PDA

View Full Version : Final Boot Camp To Be Offered To Tiger Users For $30?




MacRumors
Jan 21, 2007, 11:49 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

MacScoop claims to have uncovered a report (http://www.macosxrumors.com/articles/2007/01/20/apple-to-charge-mac-os-x-tiger-users-for-final-boot-camp-release) that indicates Apple may offer the final version of its popular Boot Camp software for users of Mac OS 10.4 "Tiger" for $29.99 upon its release when Leopard ships.

Boot Camp, currently in public beta, allows Intel Mac owners to boot their machine into Microsoft Windows XP. The terms (http://www.apple.com/macosx/bootcamp/terms.html) of the public beta expire upon the next release of the software or September 30, 2007, whichever comes first.

If true, the move would be reminiscent of Apple deciding to offer iChat AV for Mac OS 10.2 Jaguar users (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2003/10/20031028121155.shtml) for a $29.99 upgrade fee after a public beta, whereas users upgrading to Mac OS 10.3 Panther received the software included in the OS. Boot Camp will be included with Mac OS 10.5 Leopard.



mintlivedotcom
Jan 21, 2007, 11:50 AM
Buy Leopard!

Gherkin
Jan 21, 2007, 11:51 AM
Will you be able to use Vista with Boot Camp?

Billicus
Jan 21, 2007, 11:51 AM
I see this as neither good nor bad but I don't see why owners of Intel Macs *wouldn't* want to upgrade to 10.5...

pdpfilms
Jan 21, 2007, 11:54 AM
I don't really like this whole thing that Apple's doing...

Apple giveth (draft-N, BootCamp), and then Apple taketh away ($1.99 charge, $30 charge).

DMann
Jan 21, 2007, 11:56 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

MacScoop claims to have uncovered a report (http://www.macosxrumors.com/articles/2007/01/20/apple-to-charge-mac-os-x-tiger-users-for-final-boot-camp-release) that indicates Apple may offer the final version of its popular Boot Camp software for users of Mac OS 10.4 "Tiger" for $29.99 upon its release when Leopard ships.

Boot Camp, currently in public beta, allows Intel Mac owners to boot their machine into Microsoft Windows XP. The terms (http://www.apple.com/macosx/bootcamp/terms.html) of the public beta expire upon the next release of the software or September 30, 2007, whichever comes first.

If true, the move would be reminiscent of Apple deciding to offer iChat AV for Mac OS 10.2 Jaguar users (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2003/10/20031028121155.shtml) for a $29.99 upgrade fee after a public beta, whereas users upgrading to Mac OS 10.3 Panther received the software included in the OS. Boot Camp will be included with Mac OS 10.5 Leopard.

An incentive for 10.5 for sure.

mkrishnan
Jan 21, 2007, 11:59 AM
Apple giveth (draft-N, BootCamp), and then Apple taketh away ($1.99 charge, $30 charge).

I don't think you can compare. Boot Camp as released was ALWAYS a public beta. It was never offered with the indication that it would be a permanently free program.

Although...given what it does, what really prevents you from just continuing to use the Beta? Once you have Windows installed, BootCamp isn't doing anything for you any longer.

Hopefully, though, the final release will come with a complete set of drivers for any Apple hardware that is not natively supported in Vista (and also provide them as Vista 32 and 64 bit binaries to the extent that this is necessary).

ppc_michael
Jan 21, 2007, 12:00 PM
When I first read this, I was thinking it was saying Apple would charge for Bootcamp, period. Like, any OS release.

But now I see they would be charging for 10.4 but not 10.5. And I think that's semi-reasonable.

twoodcc
Jan 21, 2007, 12:01 PM
Buy Leopard!

that's my plan :)

longofest
Jan 21, 2007, 12:02 PM
Will you be able to use Vista with Boot Camp?

We're expecting that to be the case, but nothing positive yet that I know of.

bobber205
Jan 21, 2007, 12:04 PM
30 dollars is very reasonable. Especially if it supports all kinds of winblows, including Vista.

longofest
Jan 21, 2007, 12:05 PM
I don't really like this whole thing that Apple's doing...

Apple giveth (draft-N, BootCamp), and then Apple taketh away ($1.99 charge, $30 charge).

The "N" thing is really totally different in my view. This more lines up with previous practices, and makes more sense with what the industry does as a whole. You may put out a beta and get people hooked, and then charge for the final release. That's okay.

The N thing is different because they are kinda nickle-and-diming you, and they had already put the darn hardware in the system, so it really SHOULD be included in the software. Verizon got in trouble for this kind of situation with their V710 phones from Motorola, where they crippled a fully-funcitonal bluetooth phone. Yes, it had its differences, but it was similar in some respects.

jive
Jan 21, 2007, 12:06 PM
If BootCamp allowed the use of a BT keyboard then I'd buy it. But it doesn't. So bleh.

mrkramer
Jan 21, 2007, 12:06 PM
I don't really like this whole thing that Apple's doing...

Apple giveth (draft-N, BootCamp), and then Apple taketh away ($1.99 charge, $30 charge).

I don't remember that anybody could use the draft-N card before they paid the fee, and BootCamp wasn't ever said that it would always be free.

Small White Car
Jan 21, 2007, 12:06 PM
I don't really like this whole thing that Apple's doing...

Apple giveth (draft-N, BootCamp), and then Apple taketh away ($1.99 charge, $30 charge).

First of all, Apple NEVER "gaveth" draft-n. No one had it before they charged for it. So saying they took it away is nonsense.

And as for Boot Camp, it's no different than the 30-day free trial of Aperture. The only difference is the free-trial lasted a year instead of a month.

You're telling me that you're REALLY going to complain about getting a year-long free trial of a piece of software? That seems pretty ungrateful to me. You would have been happier if you had to pay from day 1? Why??

mkrishnan
Jan 21, 2007, 12:07 PM
If BootCamp allowed the use of a BT keyboard then I'd buy it. But it doesn't. So bleh.

My impression is that lots of people have installed with a BT kb, even though it isn't officially supported?

iJawn108
Jan 21, 2007, 12:09 PM
Will you be able to use Vista with Boot Camp?

Believe me you don't want to, it's totall garbage I ran it for a day and found it very annoying with all the warnings ect. It doesn't justify me spending $300 on it. Not to mention the DRM BS with it, if Apple put that into Leopard(whcih I have a fear of) I won't be upgrading and keeping tiger.

It's good they are offering this though :)

Small White Car
Jan 21, 2007, 12:10 PM
The N thing is different because they are kinda nickle-and-diming you, and they had already put the darn hardware in the system, so it really SHOULD be included in the software.

They're worried they'll get in trouble with the government if they give it away for free. I don't think anyone really knows if that's true or not, but it's POSSIBLE, so they're just playing it safe. I don't blame them for that.

Congress really needs to get off it's ass and clarify this situation, though...giving this away for free ISN'T what they were trying to stop with recent laws they passed, but it's getting caught up in it since there's no exemption for it specifically listed in the law.

EagerDragon
Jan 21, 2007, 12:11 PM
There will be a lot in Leopard to cause people to upgrade, as such the market for 10.4.x that want to do bootcamp and not upgrade to Leopard IMHO will be very small.

Sounds like a non-starter.

Hertog
Jan 21, 2007, 12:12 PM
I don't think you can compare. Boot Camp as released was ALWAYS a public beta. It was never offered with the indication that it would be a permanently free program.

Although...given what it does, what really prevents you from just continuing to use the Beta? Once you have Windows installed, BootCamp isn't doing anything for you any longer.



Therefore, I can imagine the Leopard Boot Camp being more then the current Beta. Perhaps the rumored Virtualisation bit is included as well, for instance.

apple_iBoy
Jan 21, 2007, 12:13 PM
If BootCamp allowed the use of a BT keyboard then I'd buy it. But it doesn't. So bleh.

My Mac Pro only came with a BT keyboard, and I've been able to use it just fine... :confused:

Eidorian
Jan 21, 2007, 12:13 PM
I'm going to buy Leopard for $69. I think I don't have to worry about this...

slughead
Jan 21, 2007, 12:28 PM
$30 for what?

I plan to upgrade to leopard anyway, but this is a bunch of crap!

Bootcamp is a cheap hack with NOTHING real to offer except a bootable PC and mac partition on the same hard drive.

If it didn't exist, a 3rd party would've come up with it.

What could the full version POSSIBLY offer?

balamw
Jan 21, 2007, 12:29 PM
So, unless the final Boot Camp has new functionality, basically it'll be $30 for the re-partitioning tool and the drivers?

The firmware, which will ship with the new Macs is he thing that does the heavy lifting, and you can install Windows without Boot Camp Assistant.

A bit steeper than I'd like, since I bought Parallels for $49, but still good news for those who want BC but don't want Leopard for one reason or another.

B

unsaltedrhino
Jan 21, 2007, 12:32 PM
My Mac Pro only came with a BT keyboard, and I've been able to use it just fine... :confused:

Yup, no problems with using Apple BT Keyboard and Mouse using the latest Bootcamp Windows drivers...

Warbrain
Jan 21, 2007, 12:33 PM
$30 for what?

I plan to upgrade to leopard anyway, but this is a bunch of crap!

Bootcamp is a cheap hack with NOTHING real to offer except a bootable PC and mac partition on the same hard drive.

If it didn't exist, a 3rd party would've come up with it.

What could the full version POSSIBLY offer?

Yea, it's not just some cheap hack. It's also all the drivers that are necessary for your components of your Mac to be used in Windows. Get off your horse.

For me, I see no issue with them making people to pay for Boot Camp if they don't want to upgrade. It's not a major issue. Sure, it's free now, but it's a public beta. OS X was once a public beta and now you pay for it. Let them make money. If you don't, there's won't be a company...yes, I know iPods make up for a good amount, but shut up.

Rocketman
Jan 21, 2007, 12:34 PM
We're expecting that to be the case, but nothing positive yet that I know of.

I do believe Vista folks gave done installs already on Boot Camp Beta. There was some talk about either Apple or Microsoft breaking that, but no evidence yet.

The $30 fee is for people that do NOT want to upgrade to Leopard. Given Leopard is likely to have some bugs on release that will not be fixed until 10.5.1 or 10.5.2, $30 for the time period until confirmed stability is a small price to pay for someone who really needs the Vista/XP functionality, and makes any money at all on it, or even has a reasonably good lifestyle.

Poor people will wait till Beta expires 9-07 and steal it anyway.

Rocketman

mahonmeister
Jan 21, 2007, 12:35 PM
I'm going to buy Leopard for $69. I think I don't have to worry about this...

Really? How do you get it so cheap?

Too bad for all us PPC users. I can't wait to run Windows on my Mac and not on my crappy PC.

Eidorian
Jan 21, 2007, 12:36 PM
Really? How do you get it so cheap?

Too bad for all us PPC users. I can't wait to run Windows on my Mac and not on my crappy PC.Education discount

Is there a time limitation to the usage of the Boot Camp Beta?

Warbrain
Jan 21, 2007, 12:36 PM
Really? How do you get it so cheap?

Too bad for all us PPC users. I can't wait to run Windows on my Mac and not on my crappy PC.

Education discount. That's how I'll do it.

jne381
Jan 21, 2007, 12:37 PM
I view this differently than most. I see the charge for boot camp as a punishment for Intel Mac buyers. They were the first to jump on the new Macs, and as a result are the people that have had to deal with all the quirks of the new machines (overheating, discolored palm rests, random shutdowns, any any thing else I don't know about).

I have a PPC machine and will wait for Santa Rosa to come out in the MBP, and I will not have to shell out the extra cash for boot camp.

Part of the appeal of a Mac is that most of the software you need is already on the machine, and people have bought Macs with the intention of running windows on it because the Mac commercials told them that they could. This extra charge for boot camp in not very nice.

Warbrain
Jan 21, 2007, 12:39 PM
I view this differently than most. I see the charge for boot camp as a punishment for Intel Mac buyers. They were the first to jump on the new Macs, and as a result are the people that have had to deal with all the quirks of the new machines (overheating, discolored palm rests, random shutdowns, any any thing else I don't know about).

I have a PPC machine and will wait for Santa Rosa to come out in the MBP, and I will not have to shell out the extra cash for boot camp.

Part of the appeal of a Mac is that most of the software you need is already on the machine, and people have bought Macs with the intention of running windows on it because the Mac commercials told them that they could. This extra charge for boot camp in not very nice.

In that frame of thought, I have no issue with charging people who want to run Windows on their Mac. You bought a Mac for Mac OS X, not so you can have a great looking machine running a horrible-looking OS. If people want to go and install Windows, then they should be charged extra because it's not the native intention of the computer.

Rocketman
Jan 21, 2007, 12:41 PM
First of all, Apple NEVER "gaveth" draft-n. No one had it before they charged for it. So saying they took it away is nonsense.

And as for Boot Camp, it's no different than the 30-day free trial of Aperture. The only difference is the free-trial lasted a year instead of a month.

You're telling me that you're REALLY going to complain about getting a year-long free trial of a piece of software? That seems pretty ungrateful to me. You would have been happier if you had to pay from day 1? Why??

These guys would be happy if Apple "offered" a voluntary retroactive fee of $29.95.

I say let them Paypal donate it to Apple :)

Rocketman

holamiamigos
Jan 21, 2007, 12:42 PM
wow.. no matter what i won't even put windows on my macbook

Konradx
Jan 21, 2007, 12:47 PM
Kind of a dumb question but will they make the beta stop working, or just be selling the full official version for $30

Earendil
Jan 21, 2007, 12:47 PM
This is simple.

Developing software cost money (omg wtf, say it aint so!)
Bootcamp is Software.
Bootcamp has been in a testing period, however used successfully by many without a cost to them.
Bootcamp goes final.
Boot camp's cost of development is made up in two parts: Leopard sales, where people pay for leopard and get BootCamp with it. And Straight BootCamp sales to older versions of the OS.

Are people honestly complaining about paying for software? Just shutup and go pirate it if you think that is the right and moral thing to do. But don't make us listen to it without SOME sort of logical and well thought out argument for while Apple should be giving you it's hard work for free.

freiheit
Jan 21, 2007, 12:48 PM
30 dollars is very reasonable. Especially if it supports all kinds of winblows, including Vista.

$30 is indeed reasonable even if you just consider the non-destructive partitioning it can do. Many apps that can do this (on the PC side -- I know of none on the Mac) cost at least $50.

Now if Apple could just slipstream the install of Windows through Boot Camp the way Parallels is claiming they can do it now. Then again, I'll probably just be buying Parallels so I can run my couple of Win apps either within or without MacOS as my needs dictate.

macfan881
Jan 21, 2007, 12:55 PM
i think theres still something more coming to boot camp that will make it worth wile perhaps some specail thing that you can run it with out booting like parales if you buy leapord i can see apple giving something more to buying the os but will offer something to the people who dont wanna upgrade just yet

findpankaj
Jan 21, 2007, 01:03 PM
No wonder Apple is posting 1 billion profit in a quarter.
Sad part is, people will still buy this boot camp program.
I don't think it will be compatible with VISTA.

Next Mac World conference should be just a Question and Answer session with Steve Jobs, asking him about these money making stunts and all the hardware problems Macs have.

flopticalcube
Jan 21, 2007, 01:04 PM
Since when have people paid for driver software? Apple is using this to get more people to switch to 10.5. Careful Apple, you are turning into Microsoft.

john7jr
Jan 21, 2007, 01:05 PM
Boot camp has ALWAYS been advertised as a beta part of Leopard. There was NEVER any hint that Apple would release the final version for Tiger users. This is just a matter of Apple being generous.

Besides, if it's paid feature for Leopard buyers, why would anyone expect them to give it away for free to Tiger users? Would you expect them to give any of Leopard's others goodies away to Tiger users for free? What kind of logic is that?

It's beta... it's intended for Leopard... I thought it was fairly clear from the start.

Maxwell Smart
Jan 21, 2007, 01:09 PM
I don't understand why people are complaining. Bootcamp has always been beta software. Apple has always said they intended to include bootcamp with Leopard and that the beta would expre at a certain point. Why are people now getting angry at apple after they will be releasing it for people who don't want to run Leopard? They could have just as easily said that in order to use Bootcamp you would need leopard, but they didn't.

flopticalcube
Jan 21, 2007, 01:10 PM
Boot camp has ALWAYS been advertised as a beta part of Leopard. There was NEVER any hint that Apple would release the final version for Tiger users. This is just a matter of Apple being generous.

Besides, if it's paid feature for Leopard buyers, why would anyone expect them to give it away for free to Tiger users? Would you expect them to give any of Leopard's others goodies away to Tiger users for free? What kind of logic is that?

It's beta... it's intended for Leopard... I thought it was fairly clear from the start.

Because I think many Intel Mac buyers were lured into their purchase under the belief that they could run Windows on their Macs as well. Now Apple is saying "Well yes you can, but only if you pay us $30 or upgrade your one year old OS for $130". It just doesn't sit well.

aquajet
Jan 21, 2007, 01:11 PM
I see this as neither good nor bad but I don't see why owners of Intel Macs *wouldn't* want to upgrade to 10.5...

If it gets the job done, then why bother? I mean, this should be common sense, right?

With that said, I'd be a bit disappointed if this turns out to be true.

Spaceman Spiff
Jan 21, 2007, 01:12 PM
Education discount. That's how I'll do it.

I remember when the Educational discount for teachers made 10.2 free.


This fee doesn't bother me, I'm upgrading anyhow.

SheriffParker
Jan 21, 2007, 01:21 PM
Is there a time limitation to the usage of the Boot Camp Beta?

Yes there is. Read the first post. Sept. 30th, 2007.

findpankaj
Jan 21, 2007, 01:29 PM
In that frame of thought, I have no issue with charging people who want to run Windows on their Mac. You bought a Mac for Mac OS X, not so you can have a great looking machine running a horrible-looking OS. If people want to go and install Windows, then they should be charged extra because it's not the native intention of the computer.

Nice try mate. But I guess the purpose of Booth Camp was to tell Intel Mac users (and millions of prospective buyers of generation 1 intel macs) that they can now run windows too on their machines. Users never told Apple that they WANT it. "Native intention of the computer" should mean that its the capability of your machine and not a trap (if you want , you can..but pay).

Also, People won't directly jump to Leopard and some users take more than an year to adopt new OS. Those guys will fall into this trap. 30 dollars or Leopard upgrade for XXX amount, when they really don't want a new OS.

Good luck with your 30 bucks....

Eidorian
Jan 21, 2007, 01:29 PM
Yes there is. Read the first post. Sept. 30th, 2007.Thanks

TheBobcat
Jan 21, 2007, 01:32 PM
Yeah but when the Beta expires, wouldn't that just mean that you could no longer use the Boot Camp Assistant to install Windows? It would seem a little shady to lock out users from accessing their Windows partition after the Beta expires.

Macnoviz
Jan 21, 2007, 01:34 PM
Bootcamp is a cheap hack with NOTHING real to offer except a bootable PC and mac partition on the same hard drive.

Cheap hack?

It took very hard work to hack this solution together, and it won those hackers 14 000 dollars. Days later Apple released boot camp beta (which was probably not the intended release date)
Even that hack was extremely hard, unstable, and risky.

jellomizer
Jan 21, 2007, 01:37 PM
I see this as neither good nor bad but I don't see why owners of Intel Macs *wouldn't* want to upgrade to 10.5...

Well there are a lot of reasons. Some of them would exclude them from using boot-camp.

1. Their System is to old and Leopard will run to slow. (but will not effect boot camp because they have PPC Macs)

2. None of the features entice them to switch. Why pay Over a Hundred Bucks for an OS, the hassle of putting on a New OS. While you have a good one. $30 for boot camp is less then $130 for Leopard.

3. People who use their Macs Primarily in Windows, yes there are people who are out there who prefer Windows over OS X. In that case what point is it for them to upgrade an OS they don't use much.

4. Macs that are used for appliance jobs. (Still they would not normally need boot camp)

5. 3rd Party software that will be needed to be fully tested on Leopard, to make sure everything works so the may upgrade every 4 years.

dragula53
Jan 21, 2007, 01:38 PM
If you don't like the way apple is charging for boot camp, refit is always available (and better).

http://refit.sourceforge.net/

repartition your drive, and create a boot menu.

it also makes triple booting possible.

open source is your friend.

You still need the boot camp driver cd ;)

syklee26
Jan 21, 2007, 01:39 PM
people forget to realize one thing here in Apple charging $30 for bootcamp. Right now Windows in Bootcamp is not supported by Apple customer service. that $30 will change that.

now if you have problems you should be able to call Apple and seek for support. As of now, you are out of luck if it doesn't work.

MacRumorUser
Jan 21, 2007, 01:58 PM
people forget to realize one thing here in Apple charging $30 for bootcamp. Right now Windows in Bootcamp is not supported by Apple customer service. that $30 will change that.

now if you have problems you should be able to call Apple and seek for support. As of now, you are out of luck if it doesn't work.

very good point.

And i'm surprised that this charge isn't mute for most people. Surely i'm not the only person who will be upgrading to 10.5 as soon as I can.

willybNL
Jan 21, 2007, 02:04 PM
Dear Steve,

it's just fine to release bootcamp for 10.4 at a price... but hunour your beta testers, the guys who had there macbooks almost killed in the process, send them all (you've got our e-mailadresses, we the 0.1 beta guys) a voucher to get it for free! We earned it right?

And if you would be really generous: put 10.5 for free for everybody, there are a lot of companies out there (not os-related) that spread there latest version to have to just support 1 version... saves lot of you helpdesk :).

p.s. Hurry up with that 10.5... :P

kalisphoenix
Jan 21, 2007, 02:07 PM
people forget to realize one thing here in Apple charging $30 for bootcamp. Right now Windows in Bootcamp is not supported by Apple customer service. that $30 will change that.

now if you have problems you should be able to call Apple and seek for support. As of now, you are out of luck if it doesn't work.

+5 Insightful.

Once it's out of beta status, they'll have to support it... won't they?

Apple probably won't care if the 1337 pirate it. I'd say it's almost sure to be a support nightmare, though.

Evangelion
Jan 21, 2007, 02:07 PM
This is simple.

Developing software cost money (omg wtf, say it aint so!)
Bootcamp is Software.
Bootcamp has been in a testing period, however used successfully by many without a cost to them.
Bootcamp goes final.
Boot camp's cost of development is made up in two parts: Leopard sales, where people pay for leopard and get BootCamp with it. And Straight BootCamp sales to older versions of the OS.

Are people honestly complaining about paying for software? Just shutup and go pirate it if you think that is the right and moral thing to do. But don't make us listen to it without SOME sort of logical and well thought out argument for while Apple should be giving you it's hard work for free.

Well, I have no issues with Apple charging for Boot Camp. But... Funny thing is that I had a full-featured OS and more apps I couls shake a stick at, and it cost me exactly zero dollars. So your comments about how charging for monmey is basically a requirement, is 100% crap.

No, software doesn't necessarily cost any money to develop. What if I were a developer and I decided to create a piece of software for the pure enjoyment of creating that software? Like it or not, there are about zillion developer giving you "their hard work" for free. Hey guess what? Apple got Safari's rendering-engine for exactly zero dollars as well! As it happened, KHTML's developers though that they have no need to ask for money for their software? Firefox is free as well. OS X's BSD-groundwork was also free for Apple. As is the OpenLDAP they use, and Apache. They are all free. For some reason their developers felt that they have no need to charge money.

SheriffParker
Jan 21, 2007, 02:19 PM
Yeah but when the Beta expires, wouldn't that just mean that you could no longer use the Boot Camp Assistant to install Windows? It would seem a little shady to lock out users from accessing their Windows partition after the Beta expires.

Interesting question. Even if they don't lock you out of Windows, you still need Boot Camp Assistant to remove the partition if you decide to uninstall, or if something goes wrong with Windows (very likely :p ).

jwsmiths
Jan 21, 2007, 02:24 PM
I don't really like this whole thing that Apple's doing...

Apple giveth (draft-N, BootCamp), and then Apple taketh away ($1.99 charge, $30 charge).

When did Apple giveth draft-n? Why not use a 3rd party drive to access that draft-n feature and not pay Apple?

Apple has a right to charge for BootCamp since it involves Apple writing drivers and software for an OS other than their own. When you buy a Mac you buy OS X, if you want to use Vista on it then let Apple offer a solution and if they want to charge for it then that is fair. I don't see MS making it super-easy to dual boot into Linux (rather the linux community makes the tools that make dual booting easy).

jwsmiths
Jan 21, 2007, 02:33 PM
So, unless the final Boot Camp has new functionality, basically it'll be $30 for the re-partitioning tool and the drivers?

The firmware, which will ship with the new Macs is he thing that does the heavy lifting, and you can install Windows without Boot Camp Assistant.

A bit steeper than I'd like, since I bought Parallels for $49, but still good news for those who want BC but don't want Leopard for one reason or another.

B

I think basically Apple will start offering trouble shooting support with BootCamp and driver updates and such as part of that $30. Why is that not fair since XP/Vista isn't their OS. Maybe they'll add the ability to create more than 2 bootable partitions into the manager and an easier way of selecting which OS to boot to (such as an easy to use menu in both the Windows and Mac side, Linux too if they feel ambitious).

Multimedia
Jan 21, 2007, 02:35 PM
I am opposed to anything that helps delay migration to the current OS X. While I think it's wonderful for all the laggards, I wish you had to buy Leopard to get Boot Camp. Each major OS X release is only $130 list $75 academic. So I think paying $30 to add Boot Camp to Tiger is throwing good new Leopard money after bad old Tiger. :p

cb31
Jan 21, 2007, 02:38 PM
Apple. From the moral high ground they are nickel and dimeing their way to be the new Microsoft. When will it be cool to switch back?

zwida
Jan 21, 2007, 02:43 PM
Apple. From the moral high ground they are nickel and dimeing their way to be the new Microsoft. When will it be cool to switch back?

When MS makes cool things worth owning and Apple has 95% market share.:)

Macmadant
Jan 21, 2007, 02:51 PM
why would anyone do this when for an extra $99 you can have leopard and bootcamp

powermac_daddy
Jan 21, 2007, 02:52 PM
$30 for a booty.......?

would you go for it?

Anonymous Freak
Jan 21, 2007, 02:54 PM
If BootCamp allowed the use of a BT keyboard then I'd buy it. But it doesn't. So bleh.

I've been using an Apple Wireless Keyboard in Boot Camp since the first beta. No problems at all. So it does. So... huh?

apfhex
Jan 21, 2007, 02:55 PM
you still need Boot Camp Assistant to remove the partition if you decide to uninstall
No, you'll just have to do it the hard way. :)

Boot Camp was always going to be a feature of Leopard, so I dunno why anyone would be surprised by this. At least they are making it available for Tiger users, although $30 seems like a little much for a (limited) partitioning program and a few drivers.

uNext
Jan 21, 2007, 02:57 PM
Any excuse t odefend apple any reason to hate on microsoft.
Is like computers are turning into digital religions.
Where 1 group sees apple as "GOD" the other group sees microsoft as
the "DEVIL" when in fact their both 1 in the same.

Charge for boot camp? Charge for Draft-N when is not the end users fault?
wow

So many excuses t odefend aplpe bu tat the end of the day your being sucked into apples
business tactics. You will see give it another 10+ years and ALL OF YOU WILL ADORE LINUX OR MICROSOFT MORE.

Apple ended up being the opposite of what it portrayed. Their whole strcture is based on free codes but yet
they charge for their mistakes and mishaps. They are charging us for their mistakes how funny is that

uNext
Jan 21, 2007, 03:02 PM
Well, I have no issues with Apple charging for Boot Camp. But... Funny thing is that I had a full-featured OS and more apps I couls shake a stick at, and it cost me exactly zero dollars. So your comments about how charging for monmey is basically a requirement, is 100% crap.

No, software doesn't necessarily cost any money to develop. What if I were a developer and I decided to create a piece of software for the pure enjoyment of creating that software? Like it or not, there are about zillion developer giving you "their hard work" for free. Hey guess what? Apple got Safari's rendering-engine for exactly zero dollars as well! As it happened, KHTML's developers though that they have no need to ask for money for their software? Firefox is free as well. OS X's BSD-groundwork was also free for Apple. As is the OpenLDAP they use, and Apache. They are all free. For some reason their developers felt that they have no need to charge money.

BRAVO BRAVO

thank you so much for pointing that out to him.

Object-X
Jan 21, 2007, 03:14 PM
Boot Camp works great now, but there are a few drivers missing. Bluetooth needs some work and the iSight camera too. I assume there will be a complete set of drivers for Vista. Bluetooth doesn't work at all with Vista nor does the camera. Video drivers are available at ATI for Vista, but the XP drivers in Boot Camp now don't work of course. There is also an issue with some USB bus or something that Windows is always complaining about.

So, for a complete set of working and supported drivers I think $30 is a fair price if you need to run Windows and you can't/won't upgrade to Leopard. A lot of Apple's customers don't need this ability and for those of us who do, a Leopard upgrade is almost a given. So it's nice for Apple to give Tiger users the option.

:apple:

Peace
Jan 21, 2007, 03:18 PM
Boot Camp works great now, but there are a few drivers missing. Bluetooth needs some work and the iSight camera too. I assume there will be a complete set of drivers for Vista. Bluetooth doesn't work at all with Vista nor does the camera. Video drivers are available at ATI for Vista, but the XP drivers in Boot Camp now don't work of course. There is also an issue with some USB bus or something that Windows is always complaining about.

So, for a complete set of working and supported drivers I think $30 is a fair price if you need to run Windows and you can't/won't upgrade to Leopard. A lot of Apple's customers don't need this ability and for those of us who do, a Leopard upgrade is almost a given. So it's nice for Apple to give Tiger users the option.

:apple:

Bluetooth works fine for me under Vista.

ManchesterTrix
Jan 21, 2007, 03:25 PM
why would anyone do this when for an extra $99 you can have leopard and bootcamp

Because we don't trust Leopard in a production environment when it's first released.

Toddgabweg
Jan 21, 2007, 03:25 PM
I am patiently waiting for the new OS so I can order a 24in imac...

iMacZealot
Jan 21, 2007, 03:28 PM
I'm going to buy Leopard for $69. I think I don't have to worry about this...

I can't remember or not, and if I'm wrong, please correct me.....but when Tiger came out in April '05, wasn't it $129 even on the EDU discount for a while? I know it's $69 now, but wasn't it $129 for a while?

mrsebastian
Jan 21, 2007, 03:40 PM
$30 is basically an incentive to upgrade to leopard. why wouldn't you want to it anyway for the upgrade... anyway, what i wouldn't mind seeing is a more powerful version that works more like parallels, specifically having the option to run bootcamp as it does now from startup or having a window within osx like parallels. i'd charge $30 for that as add on software. realistically, how many people actually run both operating systems. sure i installed it and used it... well once.

perhaps apple should create a "switcher's bundle"? hardware, software, etc., and an ipod shuffle and itunes gift card as a special gift. furthermore, you have a twice a year sale to promote this package: a new year, january "resolutions" sale and end of summer, back to school sale.

shyataroo
Jan 21, 2007, 03:50 PM
what are the improvemnts over the beta?

jumpinjohn
Jan 21, 2007, 03:55 PM
I cannot believe that Apple would charge for a beta. They are selling out for sure, and leading others to do the same. In fact, I downloaded a so called "trial" version for 30 days. THIRTY DAYS! I used it for free and discovered it was so helpful that I became actually quite dependent upon it. I use it all the time now, and have important documents that are now in that format. Alas, the 30 days are up and I either lose all that data and functionality or cough up the bucks. All this is Apple's fault. I am now dependent upon this software and have to pay. It is not fair.

Sounds like drug dealers to me.

All things from Apple should be free and then we would have world peace. Everyone should keep whining -- louder

see 'ya

EricNau
Jan 21, 2007, 03:59 PM
I don't think it will be compatible with VISTA.

Why not?

...Actually, Vista is already compatible with Boot Camp. Many of us are using the Vista Beta on our Macs with very few problems (considering both pieces of software are still beta releases).

I'm absolutely sure those problems will be worked out and Vista will be fully supported in Leopard (or for $30, Tiger).

zap2
Jan 21, 2007, 04:02 PM
One more reason for me not to boot Windows on my Mac(like I need any more:rolleyes: )



But in allm truth I'll get 10.5, and I'll never use bootcamp!

MDMac
Jan 21, 2007, 04:07 PM
Will the new BootCamp release eliminate the need for a reboot when switching operating systems? (a la Parallels) If that's the case, I wouldn't mind dishing out the 30 dollars.

CJD2112
Jan 21, 2007, 04:11 PM
Will you be able to use Vista with Boot Camp?

Yeah, I currently have Windows Vista RC2 running on a slave drive that I boot into by holding down the OPTION key during boot. Works like a charm (use it for AutoCAD 2007).

balamw
Jan 21, 2007, 04:13 PM
Since when have people paid for driver software? Apple is using this to get more people to switch to 10.5. Careful Apple, you are turning into Microsoft.

Hey, if it offers something more than the drivers and the re-partitioning tool, it seems like it could be worth thr $30! (e.g. the oft rumored Fast OS Switching).

B

SWC
Jan 21, 2007, 04:13 PM
Apple has made many comments about how they feel boot camp is the best solution and virtualization is not viable for them. Besides when you have Parallels and VMware etc. I think they would rather leave those headaches to other companies, there isn't a need for them to fill and with the new parallels beta to be able to run off of a bootcamp partition I wouldn't be surprised if apple wasn't helping them with some things behind the scenes.

gerrycurl
Jan 21, 2007, 04:18 PM
yes it works, i have it installed on my macbook. you need the latest bootcamp and when the instructions ask you to put in the windows xp cd and reboot, place your release version vista cd in and reboot. no funny steps required like some of the guys were posting back in the vista beta days, i've had no problems installing whatsoever.

vmware works fine with vista as well. the only problem i see is that 32 bit vista gets installed for vmware. could it be that mac os x 10.4 is not 64 bit?

apple_iBoy
Jan 21, 2007, 04:20 PM
I can't remember or not, and if I'm wrong, please correct me.....but when Tiger came out in April '05, wasn't it $129 even on the EDU discount for a while? I know it's $69 now, but wasn't it $129 for a while?

I don't think so... I'm pretty sure I got my at the Penn Computer Connection for $69 just a couple days after it was released.

Earendil
Jan 21, 2007, 04:21 PM
Well, I have no issues with Apple charging for Boot Camp. But... Funny thing is that I had a full-featured OS and more apps I couls shake a stick at, and it cost me exactly zero dollars. So your comments about how charging for monmey is basically a requirement, is 100% crap.

And what is that, Linux? Congrats, go find an open source version of bootcamp and use that, or program it yourself. Or perhaps you were implying that you pirated OSX?

No, software doesn't necessarily cost any money to develop. What if I were a developer and I decided to create a piece of software for the pure enjoyment of creating that software?


Wrong. Dead wrong. Software dev cost money. Time is money, work is money, and any of those software developers could be making *more* money if they sold their work instead of handing it out for free. However that is the beauty of open source software, it is often times developed by many different software engineers, over a long period of time. The cost to the individual may not be that great, and the volunteer effort is much appreciated. But the net value is still the same.

Like it or not, there are about zillion developer giving you "their hard work" for free. Hey guess what? Apple got Safari's rendering-engine for exactly zero dollars as well! As it happened, KHTML's developers though that they have no need to ask for money for their software? Firefox is free as well.

And news flash, Safari is free!! Apple developers who go to work every day to bring home money for their family end up working on a free product. I'm sure they enjoy the fact that Apple pays their checks from funds from other sources of revenue.

In fact modern programming languages are built on "free" code. Entire libraries of pre written code exist in order to save the modern developer coding time. I can write what would be highly complex programs with a few lines of code thanks to the extensive C++/Java/C# libraries. Every other modern high level language I'm aware of has similar libraries.

This does not negate the fact that a person spends their time creating a work (improved upon a base or not) and compensation is sometimes helpful.

OS X's BSD-groundwork was also free for Apple. As is the OpenLDAP they use, and Apache. They are all free. For some reason their developers felt that they have no need to charge money.

See above.

There are two different paths for software, Open Source or Company product. One is generally free, the other is generally not. Perhaps one day all software will be open source and free, and in my spare time I'll dev software for the fun of it. But when that day comes I'll be out of a day to day job, and will have to go to work as a carpenter or something, and only code in my free time. Personally I quite enjoy getting paid to code, and I also like dinking around in my spare time on side projects.

Apple can not hand out all software for free. There is a breaking point where the time and energy spent on all software dev must be recuperated at least in part. Apple is a business, with stock holders and a goal. 1 infinite look is not a gathering of people who all go into a building every day in order to work for free.

Personally I'm ecstatic that Apple releases all the software they do for the total cost that they do. OSX is is an amazing project that despite having open source aspects is still an accomplishment that I don't think you comprehend. Past that there is ongoing support that is "free" through updates and tech.
If I pulled off making OSX I'd charge more than $130, personally. And screw discounts. On top of that I probably wouldn't allow you to bother me for help getting it to work, especially not for free, or pennies.

But if you dislike companies selling products, by all means find an open source solution or make it yourself. And if their exists a specialized product that is beyond the open source community or your own skill to deliver in the time frame you need it, than pay the company that did.

Apple is fully justified in charging for it's products, even if it's not what you want. Would I like it for free? Of course. But am I willing to pay for the hard work another human being put into it? Yes, because it's worth it to me (or would be if I could find a company willing to give me an Intel Mac for free, maybe I'll complain about that...).

To be grateful a product is free is one thing. To whine moan and complain because a product cost money is just beyond me.:(

~Tyler

Earendil
Jan 21, 2007, 04:28 PM
Any excuse t odefend apple any reason to hate on microsoft.
Is like computers are turning into digital religions.
Where 1 group sees apple as "GOD" the other group sees microsoft as
the "DEVIL" when in fact their both 1 in the same.

Charge for boot camp? Charge for Draft-N when is not the end users fault?
wow

So many excuses t odefend aplpe bu tat the end of the day your being sucked into apples
business tactics. You will see give it another 10+ years and ALL OF YOU WILL ADORE LINUX OR MICROSOFT MORE.

Apple ended up being the opposite of what it portrayed. Their whole strcture is based on free codes but yet
they charge for their mistakes and mishaps. They are charging us for their mistakes how funny is that

Outside of asking you to think before you post, or at least turn on OSX's auto check spell, I have just a few questions...

What product, free or otherwise, is it that that you buy that is free of any defect now or in the future? Because you seem to be holding Apple to some standard of perfection that someone else accomplishes here on Earth that makes Apple immoral for holding to.

Even your life wasn't free or without error. If you are unsure of this, ask your mom and an english prof.

geiger167
Jan 21, 2007, 04:40 PM
Well been running Vista on my Imac 23' for months now not really had any problems. Only installed it so I could play with my xbox 360 hd drive and enjoy some hi def films on the nice 23' imac display (since at present apple software doesnt support the playback of this type of movie and the imac is in my bedroom so it's easy to connect it)
See no great trauma paying for bootcamp final release since it was beta software, dont really understand complaints regarding this. In fact since I will no doubt be buying the new osx and it comes free with that it's a added incentive to buy the upgrade, Hopefully by then there will be support for hd dvd playback anyway and I can bin VISTA altogether anyway so it's all bonuses from my point of view.
It's also worth noting Apple are a business and not some evangelical software company trying to save the world by giving away free software lol.

Earendil
Jan 21, 2007, 04:45 PM
It's also worth noting Apple are a business and not some evangelical software company trying to save the world by giving away free software lol.

I'm replying mostly so people read your comment again. I think that is where a few people on the boards here have lost their way. That, or they are pre working world and don't understand the basic business world.

RichP
Jan 21, 2007, 04:46 PM
To all the whiners:

Go buy a PC. Then you dont even NEED bootcamp! And, you will save time but not needing to post (whine) on this forum.




***
Seriously,
Apple will sell what, 20 copies of Bootcamp? Everyone will be running Leopard by Fall 07 when Bootcamp expires. And, even at $30, its a bargain to be able to run Windows on a Mac at full speed, something unheard of just over a year ago.

The irony is if Apple charged us $30 for the Beta from the beginning, we would have all purchased it for that price and been happy as ever with the new functionality it offered.

pale9
Jan 21, 2007, 04:47 PM
hey, i love my three apple computers and will surely upgrade to leopard, BUT i dont like ONE BIT that apple now thinks they have to nickel and dime us to death! what next? pay $1.99 for each incremental upgrade from now on? a yearly 'maintenance' charge? that apple is not run by mother theresa's is becoming more apparent, did you know that apple insisted on copy protection for itunes songs even when the artist/label did not?!

a piece of good advice, steve, don't fix something thats not broken.....

Multimedia
Jan 21, 2007, 04:53 PM
With all the sophisticated Pocket Windows applications out there already, Apple is going to have to offer a Boot Camp for Pocket Windows with the iPhone.

Marlon_JBT
Jan 21, 2007, 04:54 PM
BootCamp = $30.
Leopard = $69

BootCamp = Allows you to dual boot Windows on a Mac.
Leopard = A heck of a lot more and BootCamp. Entire Operating System. More expensive, but way better value.

I'm buying Leopard.

japanime
Jan 21, 2007, 05:00 PM
I think I'll save my $30. I know it means I won't be able to boot into Windows, but I'm pretty sure I'll be able to survive with just OSX.

:D

iEdd
Jan 21, 2007, 05:03 PM
Final bootcamp version = good.
Bootcamp seen by Apple to be worth $30 = great.
Said Great Bootcamp version included in Leopard which everyone should buy = fantastic! :)

Superdrive
Jan 21, 2007, 05:18 PM
Here are a number of points:

-Apple is not charging for Boot Camp Beta, they are charging for Boot Camp Final for Tiger.

-Apple could have released Boot Camp for free with purchase of Leopard and left Tiger users in the dust, is $30 for legacy software that big of a deal when you could have had nothing instead?

-This is not a new process. iChat AV for Jaguar cost $30. Like Boot Camp, it was made clear that the BETA software would expire and the final version would be available for purchase with Panther (Leopard) or standalone.

-This process is completely different than the Wireless N issue. Don't even try to compare it.

RichP
Jan 21, 2007, 05:39 PM
With all the sophisticated Pocket Windows applications out there already, Apple is going to have to offer a Boot Camp for Pocket Windows with the iPhone.

best...post...ever? :D

mlrproducts
Jan 21, 2007, 05:40 PM
I cannot believe that Apple would charge for a beta. They are selling out for sure, and leading others to do the same. In fact, I downloaded a so called "trial" version for 30 days. THIRTY DAYS! I used it for free and discovered it was so helpful that I became actually quite dependent upon it. I use it all the time now, and have important documents that are now in that format. Alas, the 30 days are up and I either lose all that data and functionality or cough up the bucks. All this is Apple's fault. I am now dependent upon this software and have to pay. It is not fair.

Sounds like drug dealers to me.

All things from Apple should be free and then we would have world peace. Everyone should keep whining -- louder

see 'ya

Are you BLEEPing retarded????????? I mean seriously????

You're clearly NOT talking about BootCamp, since it isn't 30 days. In that case, you are a MORON because any Apple trial software you downloaded was titled exactly that, TRIAL! Why do you think they make trial software???? The whole point is to get people hooked on a good program, and give people a chance to try it out.

Everyone quit b*tching, and if you're going to do it, know what you're talking about.

daneoni
Jan 21, 2007, 05:46 PM
I already spent my 30 bucks/quid.....on Parallels.

RichP
Jan 21, 2007, 05:49 PM
Are you BLEEPing retarded????????? I mean seriously????


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarcasm :D

RealMcCoy
Jan 21, 2007, 06:06 PM
BootCamp = $30.
Leopard = $69

BootCamp = Allows you to dual boot Windows on a Mac.
Leopard = A heck of a lot more and BootCamp. Entire Operating System. More expensive, but way better value.

I'm buying Leopard.


Leopard for $69 ? Come on people ... it will be more expensive ... the $69 days are over !

Anyway ... I will get it ;o)

boxlight
Jan 21, 2007, 06:11 PM
I'm buying Leopard so it doesn't really matter, but I have not used Bootcamp since I bought Parallels. I'll probably remove my Bootcamp partition soon.

hagjohn
Jan 21, 2007, 06:15 PM
For the same reasons why Windows users do not want to upgrade.

I see this as neither good nor bad but I don't see why owners of Intel Macs *wouldn't* want to upgrade to 10.5...

xUKHCx
Jan 21, 2007, 06:16 PM
I'm buying Leopard so it doesn't really matter, but I have not used Bootcamp since I bought Parallels. I'll probably remove my Bootcamp partition soon.

Why not do it the other way around. Delete the Parallels Harddrive and boot from the bootcamp partition, gives you the good of Parallels with the good of boot camp. It is what i do, although i do have the parallels harddrive image storage on an external if i ever need it.

jonharris200
Jan 21, 2007, 06:26 PM
How much will it cost for Leopard without Boot Camp? :D

jonharris200
Jan 21, 2007, 06:28 PM
Careful Apple, you are turning into Microsoft.
As in ... a for-profit business? ;)

louish
Jan 21, 2007, 06:32 PM
$30 is not a lot. Going out to dinner for 2 is usually more than $30, and you end up crapping out your meal the next morning. I think its funny some people complain about software being $30 when they use it every day.

Master Atrus
Jan 21, 2007, 06:36 PM
So I've read most of these posts and I don't understand one thing.

I currently own Adobe Creative Suite 2, so I downloaded Photoshop CS3 beta, now I expect that in a few months I'll have to purchase CS3 and I sure don't expect Adobe to just give me Photoshop because I've been using it. I also know that it is a beta, and therefore, by definition, not final and not mine for permanent use. So why is everyone upset about Apple charging when the beta expires?!?!?!?!?!? This makes no sense at all.

Master Atrus

MacBookPro 2.16:apple:

wtfk
Jan 21, 2007, 06:39 PM
...they're "income streams."

Xapplimatic
Jan 21, 2007, 06:40 PM
If BootCamp allowed the use of a BT keyboard then I'd buy it. But it doesn't. So bleh.

BootCamp does not DISallow use of a BT keyboard.. get inventive... You can install drivers after you've installed bootcamp.. nothing says you can't do that. If it isn't set up for you, set it up yourself.

mambodancer
Jan 21, 2007, 06:48 PM
First of all, Apple NEVER "gaveth" draft-n. No one had it before they charged for it. So saying they took it away is nonsense.

And as for Boot Camp, it's no different than the 30-day free trial of Aperture. The only difference is the free-trial lasted a year instead of a month.

You're telling me that you're REALLY going to complain about getting a year-long free trial of a piece of software? That seems pretty ungrateful to me. You would have been happier if you had to pay from day 1? Why??

or Adobe for Lightroom, Photoshop CS3, Boinx Fotomagic 2, etc. etc.

Chupa Chupa
Jan 21, 2007, 08:04 PM
Unlike the 'n' firmware, I'm not sure why people feel they are entitled to a free copy of Bootcamp for Tiger. Frankly I'm amazed Apple is even OFFERING BC for Tiger. I am sure if it wasn't people would be whining about that decision. Be glad Apple shared the beta with the public.

$30 may be cheap or expensive, depending on your perspective, but I think the marketplace will be the final arbiter. Personally I probably wouldn't pay $30 for it (moot since I'm buying Leopard). I find Parallels much handier though.

gwangung
Jan 21, 2007, 08:14 PM
Unlike the 'n' firmware, I'm not sure why people feel they are entitled to a free copy of Bootcamp for Tiger.

Because they're even greedier than the "greedy" corporations they're criticizing.

Dagless
Jan 21, 2007, 08:36 PM
If BootCamp allowed the use of a BT keyboard then I'd buy it. But it doesn't. So bleh.

It does.

iMac C2D w/ BT keyboard and mouse. Works. Doesn't recognise it until the system has fully booted up like, but its there.

EagerDragon
Jan 21, 2007, 08:39 PM
wow.. no matter what i won't even put windows on my macbook

I will so I can hack it from the same machine using the virtual machine products. I should be able to create a virtual network hosting multiple windows versions to hack into and my packets never leave the machine.

Stridder44
Jan 21, 2007, 08:47 PM
Apple. From the moral high ground they are nickel and dimeing their way to be the new Microsoft. When will it be cool to switch back?


Wow way to be dramatic about it. You remind me of those people who are driving in front of you near a stop sign, then SLAM on their brakes and get out of the car saying "OMG YOU HIT ME! MY BACK OMG I WILL NEVER WALK AGAIN!!!1"

jumpinjohn
Jan 21, 2007, 09:45 PM
Are you BLEEPing retarded????????? I mean seriously????

You're clearly NOT talking about BootCamp, since it isn't 30 days. In that case, you are a MORON because any Apple trial software you downloaded was titled exactly that, TRIAL! Why do you think they make trial software???? The whole point is to get people hooked on a good program, and give people a chance to try it out.

Everyone quit b*tching, and if you're going to do it, know what you're talking about.

EXACTLY! I was CLEARLY NOT talking about BootCamp with the 30 day trial comparison. And that is EXACTLY my point that these evil companies put out TRIAL software to get us to BUY it. Very DECEPTIVE.

SAME with BETA software NO MATTER HOW LONG IT IS OUT THERE, they expect you to PAY FOR IT someday. This leads to ridiculousness of people complaining. Therefore everything should be FREE. GET IT????

See 'ya,

jumpinjohn
Jan 21, 2007, 09:50 PM
So I've read most of these posts and I don't understand one thing.

I currently own Adobe Creative Suite 2, so I downloaded Photoshop CS3 beta, now I expect that in a few months I'll have to purchase CS3 and I sure don't expect Adobe to just give me Photoshop because I've been using it. I also know that it is a beta, and therefore, by definition, not final and not mine for permanent use. So why is everyone upset about Apple charging when the beta expires?!?!?!?!?!? This makes no sense at all.

Master Atrus

MacBookPro 2.16:apple:

Alas, you have been brainwashed. Since you are using the beta and find it a useful tool, everyone knows that Adobe is just suckering you to spend money so they can make a profit. Filthy dogs. :D

You probably also think you should pay for food, gasoline, and clothing also. Go ahead, admit it.:D

jumpinjohn
Jan 21, 2007, 09:52 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarcasm :D

Thank you for noticing! :rolleyes:

Some people take this all so serious. I'll bet most of the complainers spent more than $30 for fast food last week...
:apple:

SiliconAddict
Jan 21, 2007, 09:55 PM
Buy Leopard!

BootCamp I know will be stable because I've been using it since the day it was released by Apple.
I can't say the same about Leopard. So for those who don't want to be early adopters, and ginny pigs this is a good option. I'm going to be honest here. The stories I heard from my friends about their upgrade, and subsequent downgrade, experience with Tiger when it first launched makes me very twitchy about going anywhere near Leopard until 10.5.1.
I'm still someone on the bench about upgrading in an of itself. Right now the feature set for me simply does not warrant the theoretical $130 upgrade price. Now if Apple REALLY wows us with some "Top Secret" features between now and launch I may change my tune. Right now? Meh. Whatever.

Unlike the Pre-N upgrade though I consider this a pretty good deal. Tiger wasn't designed to dual boot with Windows. That is a new, very large, feature for the Mac. Up til now we have been using beta software. Just about every beta out there is usually free, whereas the the final version is paid. This is a very common practice. $30 for the ability it pretty nice considering they COULD simpply put the feature in Leopard and tell everyone to go buy Leopard if you want the feature. I'm been pounding on Apple lately for being very Microsoftian in some of their decisions. This, for once, is very Apple. Now if only Apple could get the bloody mouse and suspend to work right on the latest drivers they released...:rolleyes:

SheriffParker
Jan 21, 2007, 10:29 PM
Well been running Vista on my Imac 23' for months now not really had any problems. Only installed it so I could play with my xbox 360 hd drive and enjoy some hi def films on the nice 23' imac display

Where did you get a 23-foot iMac??? :eek:

SWC
Jan 21, 2007, 10:29 PM
Didn't parallels do the same thing? I mean I don't hear people bitching about that. Yet theyll run to them to not buy bootcamp because apple gave the beta away and MIGHT (afterall this is a rumor and we know how many of those are false) charge for the final version.

SMM
Jan 21, 2007, 11:16 PM
I don't really like this whole thing that Apple's doing...

Apple giveth (draft-N, BootCamp), and then Apple taketh away ($1.99 charge, $30 charge).

Yes, charging money for their products, and such extravagant amounts. When will it ever stop? Possibly when they go bankrupt listening to whiners.

bassism
Jan 21, 2007, 11:25 PM
I think people forget here that Boot Camp is intended to be a feature of Leopard...
They're not obligated to make it available for Tiger users, free, or otherwise.
I would applaud them for making it available to those who justifiably don't want to upgrade to Leopard for reasons already mentioned in the thread.

SMM
Jan 21, 2007, 11:28 PM
Since when have people paid for driver software? Apple is using this to get more people to switch to 10.5. Careful Apple, you are turning into Microsoft.

Pleeeese, keep this in the 'here and now'. Your opinion is lacking in everything except humor.

uNext
Jan 22, 2007, 12:11 AM
Point blank the moral of the story is this.

Hmm...charging $30 for a compilation of Windows drivers, most of which were written by HW vendors.
Sounds to me like apple is starting a "charge for drivers trend"

They truly are THINKING DIFFRENT.

Enough said.

Now bow down to apple and cry in the future when they start charging you 1.99
for turning on the computer, opening any app 20cents. $2.99 for opening safari and .30 cents per page load.
iKinkos


And even then some of you idiots will still bow down to apple and find excuses to justify the prices.
"well thats common business practice kinkos been doing for years i dont see why apple is under fire for doing it" lol

balamw
Jan 22, 2007, 12:17 AM
Hmm...charging $30 for a compilation of Windows drivers, most of which were written by HW vendors.


Don't forget the non-destructive HFS+ repartitioning tool, and who knows what else they'll throw in the package.

It would be $15 cheaper than iPartition and definitely works.

B

Earendil
Jan 22, 2007, 12:19 AM
Point blank the moral of the story is this.

Hmm...charging $30 for a compilation of Windows drivers, most of which were written by HW vendors.
Sounds to me like apple is starting a "charge for drivers trend"

They truly are THINKING DIFFRENT.

Enough said.


Are you a software engineer? Inside knowledge of Apple or HW?
Yeah, didn't think so. 'Nuff said.

steelfist
Jan 22, 2007, 12:50 AM
MacScoop, i hope you are wrong, even if bootcamp is well worth the price.

WildPalms
Jan 22, 2007, 01:10 AM
If BootCamp allowed the use of a BT keyboard then I'd buy it. But it doesn't. So bleh.

Thats not BootCamp stopping you from using your BlueTooth keyboard....once the Windows OS has booted, BootCamp is done and out of the picture. Windows support for BlueTooth keyboards is your issue.

I don't really like this whole thing that Apple's doing...

Apple giveth (draft-N, BootCamp), and then Apple taketh away ($1.99 charge, $30 charge).

Its a legal issue, not a greed issue.

Will you be able to use Vista with Boot Camp?

Does Vista support EFI?

No wonder Apple is posting 1 billion profit in a quarter.
Sad part is, people will still buy this boot camp program.
I don't think it will be compatible with VISTA.

Next Mac World conference should be just a Question and Answer session with Steve Jobs, asking him about these money making stunts and all the hardware problems Macs have.

Bye findpankaj :apple:

gwangung
Jan 22, 2007, 01:17 AM
Point blank the moral of the story is this.

Hmm...charging $30 for a compilation of Windows drivers, most of which were written by HW vendors.
Sounds to me like apple is starting a "charge for drivers trend"

They truly are THINKING DIFFRENT.

Really? Most of us think they're doing pretty much any other business is doing.

Of course, most of us get out of the house every now and then...



Enough said.


Yeah, guess so.

Jeezus, when are you guys gonna grow up....

WildPalms
Jan 22, 2007, 01:25 AM
With all the sophisticated Pocket Windows applications out there already, Apple is going to have to offer a Boot Camp for Pocket Windows with the iPhone.
No they wont. Thats a ridiculous statement.

iEdd
Jan 22, 2007, 01:53 AM
No they wont. Thats a ridiculous statement.
I'm 99% sure he was joking ;)

Evangelion
Jan 22, 2007, 02:07 AM
And what is that, Linux?

In my case, yes.

Congrats, go find an open source version of bootcamp and use that, or program it yourself. Or perhaps you were implying that you pirated OSX?

No, I have not pirated OS X.

Wrong. Dead wrong. Software dev cost money.

By your definition, EVERYTHING costs money. Want to have some friends over for a party? Pay them, I mean, they are spending their time at your place, and time is money. Oh, I'm jut spending my valuable time typing this reply, better hand me some cash ASAP.

Time is money, work is money, and any of those software developers could be making *more* money if they sold their work instead of handing it out for free.

That kind of thinking is the root cause why our society is so screwed up these days. What happened to doing things because you get enjoyment out of it, instead of doing something for earning a buck or two? Like it or not, there is more to life than money. A lot more. And like it or not, there are lots of people doign things for free. And they get their rewards for their work, they just might not get any money from it. KHTML-developers? No, they didn't get any money when Apple and Nokia chose their code for the basis of their browser. So what did they get? They get patches and improvements that made their software even better. They got that great feeling when they realized that there will be millions upon millions of people using their software.

However that is the beauty of open source software, it is often times developed by many different software engineers, over a long period of time.

And many times it's not.

The cost to the individual may not be that great, and the volunteer effort is much appreciated. But the net value is still the same.

What cost? If some developer uses his free time developing some free app, what does it cost him? Electricity? Well, is there a difference between spending that electricity for coding, as opposed to reading macrumors.com? Or playing Gears of War on Xbox360?

And news flash, Safari is free!!

Last time I checked, it's part of OS X, and OS X is not free.

Apple developers who go to work every day to bring home money for their family end up working on a free product. I'm sure they enjoy the fact that Apple pays their checks from funds from other sources of revenue.

And that means that when some developer writes free software, it also "costs money"? How exactly? Yes, many such developers are paid for their work, but many are not.

This does not negate the fact that a person spends their time creating a work (improved upon a base or not) and compensation is sometimes helpful.

So, "sometimes"? It's not absolutely required anymore? Of course it helps if someone gives money for the software. But that does not mean that it's absolutely required to ask money for the software, just becuase they spent their "valuable time" on it. Hell, I spent about one hour of my "valuable time" playing with my Nintendo Wii, who should I send the bill for my time?

See above.

See what? Some mind-numbing rambling about how "time is money!"?

There are two different paths for software, Open Source or Company product.

Everything Red Hat writes is released as free software. Yet they earn quite a bit of money from software.

Apple can not hand out all software for free.

Where exactly did I say that they should do that? I said that I have no problems with them charging for Boot Camp. I have no problems with them asking money for other pieces of software. What I did was to challenge the mentality that "software-developement costs money, and therefore asking money for software is a requirement!". There is a huge pool of software out there that goes totally against that claimy, and I merely pointed that out. I did NOT say that "I demand that Apple releases all their software for free!"

But if you dislike companies selling products, by all means find an open source solution or make it yourself.

Did you actually read my comment at all? Let me repeat what I said in the VERY FIRST SENTENCE OF MY POST:

Well, I have no issues with Apple charging for Boot Camp.

Is the above comment written in Esperanto or something, or why is it so hard to understand?

Apple is fully justified in charging for it's products, even if it's not what you want.

Like I said: "I have no issues with Apple charging for Boot Camp.". Do I need to repeat it again? "I have no issues with Apple charging for Boot Camp."

To be grateful a product is free is one thing. To whine moan and complain because a product cost money is just beyond me.:(

Once more for the road: "I have no issues with Apple charging for Boot Camp."

iEdd
Jan 22, 2007, 02:19 AM
People get up, get dressed and go to work for 8 hours. Sorry to disappoint you, but their houses don't pay for themselves. They enjoy their work? Good. Doesn't mean they shouldn't get paid for it. It's not all fun either. Debugging is hell.
They are even including it with the next OS release. Could they be any more reasonable. (Or the better question, could you be any more unreasonable?)
EDIT: What? Now you have no problem with them charging for boot camp. Okay, me neither.

Evangelion
Jan 22, 2007, 02:52 AM
People get up, get dressed and go to work for 8 hours. Sorry to disappoint you, but their houses don't pay for themselves. They enjoy their work? Good. Doesn't mean they shouldn't get paid for it. It's not all fun either. Debugging is hell.

Like I said, there are plenty of software that are written for the fun of it, and not as a part of a "work". No, I'm not saying that charging money for software is wrong. What I AM saying is that there's lots of software written for other reasons than monetary compensation.`I NEVER said tht "Boo, Apple should release Boot Camp for free!". What I DID say was "Well, you can write software for your own enjoyment, withour requiring others to pay for the software". But maybe that idea is alien to Mac-users, since even the tiniest pieces of software on the Mac seem to have a pricetag attached to them? Is the idea that someone writes software, and simply gives it away so totally alien to you guys? Do you really believe that everything and everyone is about money?

EDIT: What? Now you have no problem with them charging for boot camp. Okay, me neither.

Um, I never had any problems with them charging for it. Doesn't anyone read the comments they are replying to? Is there something wrong with my English or something? What part of "Well, I have no issues with them charging for Boot Camp" is hard to understand?

Earendil
Jan 22, 2007, 02:54 AM
First off, I want to start by apologizing to Evangelion, and misrepresenting his post. A few other members disregard for the way things exist today, and the software engineering field, got me a bit more rattled than I should have been. Evangelism was one of the few to take one of my posts to task, and called one of my statements "absolute crap" which caused me to spin off in not so much a direct response to him, though I definitely worded it that way, but more others on the board. Again, my apologize.

By your definition, EVERYTHING costs money. Want to have some friends over for a party? Pay them, I mean, they are spending their time at your place, and time is money. Oh, I'm jut spending my valuable time typing this reply, better hand me some cash ASAP.

That kind of thinking is the root cause why our society is so screwed up these days. What happened to doing things because you get enjoyment out of it, instead of doing something for earning a buck or two? Like it or not, there is more to life than money. A lot more. And like it or not, there are lots of people doign things for free. And they get their rewards for their work, they just might not get any money from it. KHTML-developers? No, they didn't get any money when Apple and Nokia chose their code for the basis of their browser. So what did they get? They get patches and improvements that made their software even better. They got that great feeling when they realized that there will be millions upon millions of people using their software.

You took the idea of Apple making money to a philosophical level. I don't think we really need to debate that here on the forum. If you would like to discuss the morals of money and society with me we can do that in private. Though I dare say we probably agree on the philosophical level.

What cost? If some developer uses his free time developing some free app, what does it cost him? Electricity? Well, is there a difference between spending that electricity for coding, as opposed to reading macrumors.com? Or playing Gears of War on Xbox360?

Yes. Though you did not claim it, others here are claiming that it should be free. Your claim that other software is free only backed up their claim. My reply was in the case of open source vs Apple, and how reality sits at the moment. Apple can not give away software, and to ask them to do so right now is absurd. I'm aware that you did not suggest this.



Last time I checked, it's part of OS X, and OS X is not free.

Can't we use that logic to say that even the icons cost money?
There is a difference there in time and effort.

And that means that when some developer writes free software, it also "costs money"? How exactly? Yes, many such developers are paid for their work, but many are not.

I'm going to hazard a wild uneducated stab in the dark and say more lines of code were compensated for in the world of software than not.

So, "sometimes"? It's not absolutely required anymore? Of course it helps if someone gives money for the software. But that does not mean that it's absolutely required to ask money for the software, just becuase they spent their "valuable time" on it. Hell, I spent about one hour of my "valuable time" playing with my Nintendo Wii, who should I send the bill for my time?

Which is different. The problem is the forum telling Apple and the individual developers at Apple what their time is worth. You wouldn't want a bunch of people telling you what you did for a living wasn't worth compensation. Saying that someone else in the world does your line of work for free in his spare time really doesn't justify not paying you.

I've worked in software engineering, and will have my degree shortly, so the idea hits home a little more for me perhaps. Perhaps, that is, I'm not sure what your line of work is, and perhaps you are a computer scientist as well.

In the end, sadly I would like money because the world more or less requires it to get by. I'd like to get paid to do what I enjoy, and I'm paying for an education that will allow that. While I applaud the open source community, and have worked on a project myself, it irks me a little bit to have people that do not belong to the field, disregard the effort that was put into software like bootcamp as nothing more than child's play. Better yet, as apple stealing someone else's code and charging money for it. I'm aware this is not you, though your comments as seen through my knee jerk reaction appeared to be defending that point. Again, apologizes :( .

Friends?

Like I said, there are plenty of software that are written for the fun of it, and not as a part of a "work". No, I'm not saying that charging money for software is wrong. What I AM saying is that there's lots of software written for other reasons than monetary compensation.`I NEVER said tht "Boo, Apple should release Boot Camp for free!". What I DID say was "Well, you can write software for your own enjoyment, withour requiring others to pay for the software". But maybe that idea is alien to Mac-users, since even the tiniest pieces of software on the Mac seem to have a pricetag attached to them? Is the idea that someone writes software, and simply gives it away so totally alien to you guys? Do you really believe that everything and everyone is about money?

Is there something wrong with my English or something? What part of "Well, I have no issues with them charging for Boot Camp" is hard to understand?

I think the problem is that within the contest of the conversation at hand, it can be easy to miss what you are trying to say.
In this case there is Apple, a for profit organization releasing software that they plan to make money on. And there are those Apple users that think it should be free.

I made the mistake of you claiming that "software can be free, here are examples" as defending the position that Apple should release it for free. Apple is not open source, and so defending the position of open source isn't quite relevant except as a nitpick to posts like mine. Though my posts are often times not entirely relevant either :D
Just pointing out what may be going through other people's heads, or at least mine.

As for Apple users being foreign to open source and free software, I think those flaming Apple for charging money shows that it is not foreign in the least bit! Though perhaps a little bit unrealistic in context of who the developers are.

CHess
Jan 22, 2007, 03:51 AM
Now bow down to apple and cry in the future when they start charging you 1.99
for turning on the computer, opening any app 20cents. $2.99 for opening safari and .30 cents per page load.


Thank you, Nostradamus, I'll write that down and make sure to give you credit when that happens. Oh, wait, I'm almost out of toilet paper. Sorry.

I personally don't give a flip about Boot Camp. I personally find it an inconvenient way to run Windows (having to reboot to get back and forth from OS X). Having to use Windows for anything is already an inconvenience.

People were badmouthing Apple from the start with the Intel machines because they were assuming that Apple wouldn't even let you boot Windows on the machine. People were begging for Windows boot capability from the start. So, Apple creates a hook in the OS that lets you boot from another partition on your hard drive, and bundles tested hardware drivers and a repartitioning utility. So Apple wants to charge $30 for the non-beta version.

If you installed BETA software, which states up front that it's an expiring Beta license, with the final version to be a part of Leopard, and now you're acting surprised that you have to upgrade to Leopard to get it? But, Apple's willing to realease a stand alone version and you're whining that it's $30 bucks???

Go home and sob in your pillow, people...

Or better yet, just take all the energy wasted in whining and earn more than enough money to pay for the software you're using.

2ndPath
Jan 22, 2007, 04:06 AM
Boot Camp really consists of two components: The partitioning and installation helper tool on the one hand and the drivers for Windows on the other hand. Charging for drivers is very uncommon in the Windows world because most hardware is designed to be used with Windows in the first place. This is also the case for most components in todays Macs and probably most of the drivers included in Boot Camp were written by the suppliers of the corresponding devices. I don't know this, but I guess they can also be downloaded for free directly from the companies making these drivers. The partitioning and installation helper tool, however, is a different story. It has been written by Apple and is not a driver. So charging for the whole package is not unreasonable especially if they fully support it (which the MR article didn't really say anything about).

Another question: Did Apple ever mention that people could install windows on Macs as well as OSX after they released the boot camp beta in their advertisements?

Evangelion
Jan 22, 2007, 04:25 AM
I think the problem is that within the contest of the conversation at hand, it can be easy to miss what you are trying to say.
In this case there is Apple, a for profit organization releasing software that they plan to make money on. And there are those Apple users that think it should be free.

I believe that it's the developers right to determine whether to ask for money for the software or not. Apple is no different. My original comment was directed against the idea that there are basically two choices: Pay for software, or pirate software. And it was directed against the idea that "Writing software costs money, so we should pay for it". Neither claim is necessarily true.

If time is money, and we should therefore pay for the privilige of taking advantage of someone's invested time every time, there wouldn't be sites like wikipedia. Nor would there be places like forums.macrumors.com, since we have people spending their time writing messages to this forum. We have people sharing ideas and advice, yet we do not pay them one dime, even though they spend their time doing it. And they do it because they want to do it. There really is no difference when it comes to software. Yes, some people write software for profit. And some people write text for profit (books). And still, we have tons of people who write software for other motives than pure profit. And we have tons of people who write text for other purposes than pure profit (like me, when I type this message. I'm not expecting to receive any money for my invested time. My motives are elsewhere).

So, to recap: it's up to the individual developer to determine whether to ask for money or not, and Apple is no different. I personally have no issues with Apple charging for Boot Camp. But that said, charging money for software is not a requirement. And if you think that it always costs money to develop software, then you might as well think that laying on the grass and looking at the clouds also costs money. I think that things of pure enjoyment are priceless. If you enjoy doing something, thinking that "I just spent two hours doing this thing. That's 60 bucks down the drain" is simply... wrong. Or very least, it's not a key to happy life.

No, that does not mean that if you enjoy coding, you should go work for Apple (or Microsoft, or Oracle, or IBM) for free, since you would be enjoying your work. I'm talking about free time here. It's difficult to put my thoughts to words, but I hope that I'm conveying at least part of them to you guys.

c-Row
Jan 22, 2007, 05:20 AM
I think that things of pure enjoyment are priceless.

That's why Apple is gonna charge you for using Bootcamp on your machine, since Windows has absolutely nothing to do with enjoyment. :p

iShak
Jan 22, 2007, 05:47 AM
i am not saying if Apple is right or wrong to charge for boot camp, i just want to know if apple is charging to recover the development costs, because its their intellectual property?, or just because they can ...?


P.S: some of you guys should come back in 10 years time and read your comments.

mavherzog
Jan 22, 2007, 05:53 AM
Since when have people paid for driver software?
here (http://www.ecamm.com/mac/ichatusbcam/), here (http://www.ragingmenace.com/software/sidetrack/index.html), here (http://www.carvware.com/gamepadcompanion.html), and here (http://www.opensound.com/ossorder.html). (just a few examples)

Chupa Chupa
Jan 22, 2007, 07:59 AM
i just want to know if apple is charging to recover the development costs, because its their intellectual property?, or just because they can ...?


What difference does that make?

SWC
Jan 22, 2007, 08:11 AM
Last time i checked intel made the motherboard & the processor
last time i checked broadcom or atheros made their wireless cards
last time i checked seagate or toshiba made their hard drives.
Last time i checked matchita or pioneer made their superdrives.
Last time i checked ati or nvidia mde their video cards.

i can continue i mean if you narrow it down-apple keyboard, mouse and isight is whats left behind and they consider themselfs HARDWARE BASED COMPANY?

Have the nerve to charge for ONCE AGAIN 3RD PARTY DRIVERS?


Unless i am missing something with boot camp, the only diffrence is that vista does not support efi other then that is just like any oher intel based windows laptop. Which means a **** load of drivers and hardware are at your fingertips.

You know Earendil for being an excellent english prof.
You certainly do lack intelligence in other subjects.


Have you used bootcamp? I guess not judging by your post. This is more than Apple charging for "3rd party drivers". You are paying for repartitioning software more than anything. If you bought a similar program for windows (partition magic) it would cost you $69.95. iPartition for the mac costs $44.95. In addition to ONLY being able to repartition they give you a simplified install process for all of those 3rd prty drivers (which you or I may not need but a lot of folks do). You get extended functionality in their bootloader and start disk manager etc. It's more than just a collection of drivers.

dragula53
Jan 22, 2007, 08:34 AM
Have you used bootcamp? I guess not judging by your post. This is more than Apple charging for "3rd party drivers". You are paying for repartitioning software more than anything. If you bought a similar program for windows (partition magic) it would cost you $69.95. iPartition for the mac costs $44.95. In addition to ONLY being able to repartition they give you a simplified install process for all of those 3rd prty drivers (which you or I may not need but a lot of folks do). You get extended functionality in their bootloader and start disk manager etc. It's more than just a collection of drivers.

Bootcamp is a graphical front end for diskutil and a boot loader.

Diskutil is built in to the operating system (and free).

All you are really paying for is the yummy graphical front end and ease of use.

You are not gaining any functionality whatsoever from boot camp (other than a driver disk which includes drivers that should logically be provided elsewhere. I am not sure if they are yet) that you cannot get from command line diskutil and the bootloader available from refit.sourceforge.net

uNext
Jan 22, 2007, 09:13 AM
Bootcamp is a graphical front end for diskutil and a boot loader.

Diskutil is built in to the operating system (and free).

All you are really paying for is the yummy graphical front end and ease of use.

You are not gaining any functionality whatsoever from boot camp (other than a driver disk which includes drivers that should logically be provided elsewhere. I am not sure if they are yet) that you cannot get from command line diskutil and the bootloader available from refit.sourceforge.net

Yes i have used boot camp. As a matter of fact im am running vista on my macbook pro 17". I downloaded alot of the drivers from the corresponding manufacturers to be up to date. I managed to get DRAFT-N and everything else working on my windows install by doing that.

The only thing that does not work is the backlight keyboard. Everything else works and i did not even use the drivers boot camp provides.

goosnarrggh
Jan 22, 2007, 09:20 AM
Does Vista support EFI?

Irrelevant. Windows XP doesn't support EFI either. The work-around is a BIOS-compatibility layer incorporated into EFI. If I recall correctly, early versions of Apple's EFI implementation didn't include that layer, but installation of Boot Camp required the prior installation of an EFI patch which adds the BIOS compatibility layer.

iShak
Jan 22, 2007, 09:31 AM
What difference does that make?

if they are charging for work that has been put in to develop such prodcut, then i would like to see them justfiy that, cuz even a bunch of am. hackers can do that ... if they are charging just cuz they can, then it says a lot about the character .. doesnt make a whole lot of difference but then atleast the question doesnt stand out form the rest either.

(waiting for the day when someone qoutes my post and goes 'WHY ARE YOU ASKING A QUESTION???!!!!")

c-Row
Jan 22, 2007, 11:39 AM
I think Blizzard should give out WoW:BC for free, since the Beta already was. And most of its framework has already been done in WoW.

And Microsoft should offer Vista for free as well, since the Beta was, too.

Oh, and next time I am gonna test-drive a new car, I will demand to get it for free since trying it out was free, too! :cool:

Earendil
Jan 22, 2007, 12:07 PM
I believe that it's the developers right to determine whether to ask for money for the software or not. Apple is no different. My original comment was directed against the idea that there are basically two choices: Pay for software, or pirate software. And it was directed against the idea that "Writing software costs money, so we should pay for it". Neither claim is necessarily true.
*SNIP*

But see I think that is where people confused your post with a different position. No one was claiming that all software must be paid for. Personally I was making the claim that all developers have a right to charge comensation for code they write(even if they can't find any buyers willing to pay).

My own stance was not anti open source, nor saying that all software must be paid for, but instead was defending the other direction, the paid developer. I was claiming that coding is a time intensive task, and one that requires experience, skill, and education, and should be paid for if the developer so wishes.

The idea that Apple should or should not give away software is not an issue of open source, and all arguments for or against Apple doing either is not an afront to open source or a developer working in his/her spare time. It is a matter of whether a developer asking for compensation has such a right, and has such a right in this particular case.

Now if Apple were giving it away for free and people were demanding Apple charge money for it, THEN we could bring up the whole open source issue and a developers rights to give away software if he/she so pleases. And I have no problem with the open source community, in fact coding as we know it today would not be what it is without the extensive open source libraries, as I previously mentioned.

However it still stands that Apple is not an open source developer (though they do release some of their code), the developers are asking for money, and that is their right. It is their right because it was work, that requires a specialized skill most don't poses. I defended Apple on this position not because I think all work needs compensation, or because I worship money, but because of the huge bias and misunderstanding of software developers that I come in contact with daily. This board demanding Apple software engineers work for free was just enough to get a rant out of me :rolleyes:

Now Evangelism, I think we understand each other, and can agree we stand on common ground, no?

2ndPath
Jan 22, 2007, 12:23 PM
Thinking about it again, I think it might just be a bad move by Apple to let the beta expire. While it might never have actively been promoted by Apple, it was publicly known that Macs had the new feature and big advantage of beeing able to run both Mac OS and Windows. Even if Apple didn't advertise this feature, many people bought the machine exactly for this reason. If this feature is suddenly removed and has to be bought back again, this might scare a lot of people away from Apple because they get the impression of beeing cheated.

Just if I remember how often I read on these forums the comments for potential swichers that they can try the Mac now with much fewer risk, because they just can install windows as well. In the public perception this is a feature of the Mac since Boot camp was first released. To take this feature away is legal for Apple, but it might make a lot of bad press. This might not just be worth it to earn a few more dollars from selling Boot camp for Tiger.

jumpinjohn
Jan 22, 2007, 12:29 PM
I think Blizzard should give out WoW:BC for free, since the Beta already was. And most of its framework has already been done in WoW.

And Microsoft should offer Vista for free as well, since the Beta was, too.

Oh, and next time I am gonna test-drive a new car, I will demand to get it for free since trying it out was free, too! :cool:

Yes Absolutely!!! YOU get it!!! :D

I switched to apple 3 years ago and have no regrets. Prior to that I was an avid IBM ThinkPad guy. I never have seen so many whiners in all my life. And then to take it to the philosophical or relational level... Gee, I think that is wierd.

Earendil
Jan 22, 2007, 12:30 PM
Thinking about it again, I think it might just be a bad move by Apple to let the beta expire. While it might never have actively been promoted by Apple, it was publicly known that Macs had the new feature and big advantage of beeing able to run both Mac OS and Windows. Even if Apple didn't advertise this feature, many people bought the machine exactly for this reason. If this feature is suddenly removed and has to be bought back again, this might scare a lot of people away from Apple because they get the impression of beeing cheated.


I agree with you... in concept.
The catch is that Bootcamp was never installed with new Macs afaik. It required going to Apple.com and downloading it. Then, the entire installation processes and setup was not something your computer inept grandmother was going to be setting it. I would say that a fair number of people that understood how to get it running, also understand the concept of a beta app, and what the possibilities are there.

Also, Any emulation of Windows apps has always been paid for. Anyone wanting a Mac while also wanting to run windows apps on it was probably aware of virtualPC, which was a paid for program. If I tell them that now you can dual boot it with software from Apple, I think the assumption is that that software comes at a price, not as a standard.

When I buy a computer I know I am buying hardware. Functionality is brought out by different software packages which may or may not be included with the hardware. Bootcamp was not shipped with the hardware, so I don't think there is as much of an expectation of "free" as one might think.

Now I would agree with you 100% if bootcamp had come pre installed or was a simple install with the only beta warning being in the often ignored user agreement. However that isn't the case, so I think Apple will be alright in this.

balamw
Jan 22, 2007, 12:32 PM
Just if I remember how often I read on these forums the comments for potential swichers that they can try the Mac now with much fewer risk, because they just can install windows as well.
You're ignoring the fact that new Mac buyers will still get Boot Camp for free (with Leopard) when they buy their new Macs.

The ones caught in the middle are the people who buy Macs before Leopard and who don't install Windows before the beta "expires" whatever that means. Boot Camp is not needed after Windows is installed.

And if you don't like that you can always find directions to install manually and links to drivers at onmac.net.

Boot Camp beta was only released as a reaction to the onmac.net efforts to get Windows running on Macs.

B

Detlev
Jan 22, 2007, 12:52 PM
It is clearly stated that it is a beta product. Anyone interested in purchasing an Apple product purposely for the use of Windows either uses this product or Parallels and must have some knowledge beyond an neophyte's in regards to computers. Therefore, they were perfectly aware they would either upgrade to 10.5 or use the alternate program. In other words it was not given and then taken away, as say would be the case if all of a sudden we had to pay for Spotlight. You had to consciously make an effort to read, download, install, and use the program. If someone missed that it was a beta then it was their own fault.

Being a beta also invites more development. We have heard very little about the development of this utility. I do not expect it to be as mundane as it is now when incorporated in 10.5. Is there anyone here, now, making the conscious decission to NOT UPDATE their OS to 10.5? If not, why are we discussing this non-story? If so, download it now and get over it. It's free. It's not supported. It's a beta. If it stops working learn the hack. If you purchase a new machine post Leopard release then you will get the program anyway. Where is the debate?

Westside guy
Jan 22, 2007, 02:34 PM
There is already work being done to get the free boot loaders (e.g. Grub) working with EFI, so really you will have a free alternative to Boot Camp. The downside will be the lack of support, and a bit less user friendliness when setting it up.

mklos
Jan 22, 2007, 02:54 PM
I think some people are misunderstanding this just like they did with the 802.11n thing. First of all, Apple isn't making you buy this. Second, this is ONLY for users of Tiger. It will be included free as part of Leopard. Apple has already stated this at last years WWDC keynote address with Steve Jobs saying Leopard will inlcude the "whole package" of apps. Those include the next generation of Front Row, BootCamp 1.0, and the next generation of Photobooth.

Also remember that back when we all used Jaguar (OS X.2), Apple did the same thing with iChat A/V. They released it as beta during OS X.2 and then in OS X.3 they offered it as part of the OS and charged users of Jaguar $29.99 to get the entire version IF they wanted to use it.

I don't see why people are against this. Apple never stated that this would be free except with Leopard. Condering the other alternatives, I think $29.99 is a reasonable price to use Windows on your Mac. Its a lot more than just a hack. Some real time and effort is going into making bootcamp work reliably and also making the drivers for the Mac hardware work reliably in Windows.

The 802.11n thing was totally out of Apple's hands and if they didn't have to charge for it, I seriously doubt they would have. I don't see how anyone can compare the two.

2ndPath
Jan 22, 2007, 03:27 PM
You're ignoring the fact that new Mac buyers will still get Boot Camp for free (with Leopard) when they buy their new Macs.

The ones caught in the middle are the people who buy Macs before Leopard and who don't install Windows before the beta "expires" whatever that means. Boot Camp is not needed after Windows is installed.


There will always be the people who have to reinstall the operating systems at some point. I mean if there weren't any people needing it, Apple wouldn't sell it.


And if you don't like that you can always find directions to install manually and links to drivers at onmac.net.

Boot Camp beta was only released as a reaction to the onmac.net efforts to get Windows running on Macs.

B

Yes, there are ways to install windows without Boot Camp. And it doesn't really matter that it was released as a beta as a reaction to the sucess of the onmac project. From that time on the reason that you could "just install Windows on a Mac next to OSX" was an important reason to switch to a Mac. And if that suddenly gets a lot more complicated, some people will complain about Apple having crippled their machine. Let's hope it won't affect many people so there won't be a lot of noise.

Also the question is what happens when the beta expires. Will the versions which were downloaded before stop working or will there just be a charge for the download of Boot Camp. If it is the last, I don't really see a problem coming up.

gwangung
Jan 22, 2007, 04:54 PM
There is already work being done to get the free boot loaders (e.g. Grub) working with EFI, so really you will have a free alternative to Boot Camp. The downside will be the lack of support, and a bit less user friendliness when setting it up.

Ummm...and that's not worth $30 to some people?

SiliconAddict
Jan 22, 2007, 05:34 PM
I am opposed to anything that helps delay migration to the current OS X. While I think it's wonderful for all the laggards, I wish you had to buy Leopard to get Boot Camp. Each major OS X release is only $130 list $75 academic. So I think paying $30 to add Boot Camp to Tiger is throwing good new Leopard money after bad old Tiger. :p

ONLY a $130. Well my aren't we bleeding money out the pockets. :rolleyes: Some of us may not be able to afford such things. Esp after blowing 3 grand on a medical bill. But hay. Its ONLY money after all. :rolleyes:

bobber205
Jan 22, 2007, 07:07 PM
Last time i checked intel made the motherboard & the processor
last time i checked broadcom or atheros made their wireless cards
last time i checked seagate or toshiba made their hard drives.
Last time i checked matchita or pioneer made their superdrives.
Last time i checked ati or nvidia mde their video cards.

i can continue i mean if you narrow it down-apple keyboard, mouse and isight is whats left behind and they consider themselfs HARDWARE BASED COMPANY?

Have the nerve to charge for ONCE AGAIN 3RD PARTY DRIVERS?


Unless i am missing something with boot camp, the only diffrence is that vista does not support efi other then that is just like any oher intel based windows laptop. Which means a **** load of drivers and hardware are at your fingertips.

You know Earendil for being an excellent english prof.
You certainly do lack intelligence in other subjects.


Lol. What a dork? Do you think companies like Dell really make ALL their parts?

omg. :apple:

Ummm...and that's not worth $30 to some people?


If you've worked with Grub of Lilo, it's worth it. :D *still likes linux + grub though* :D

SWC
Jan 22, 2007, 07:12 PM
Bootcamp is a graphical front end for diskutil and a boot loader.

Diskutil is built in to the operating system (and free).

All you are really paying for is the yummy graphical front end and ease of use.

You are not gaining any functionality whatsoever from boot camp (other than a driver disk which includes drivers that should logically be provided elsewhere. I am not sure if they are yet) that you cannot get from command line diskutil and the bootloader available from refit.sourceforge.net


I guess since there are free video editing apps out there they shouldn't charge for FCP and since there are free word processors they shouldn't charge for iWork. No one makes you buy it. If it's not something you need than don't buy it stick with your free hacks. Again since diskutil can do it all (even though the functionality is only available via commandline) iPartition shouldn't exist either. Damn these companies trying to make money.

Earendil
Jan 22, 2007, 07:15 PM
I guess since there are free video editing apps out there they shouldn't charge for FCP and since there are free word processors they shouldn't charge for iWork. No one makes you buy it. If it's not something you need than don't buy it stick with your free hacks. Again since diskutil can do it all (even though the functionality is only available via commandline) iPartition shouldn't exist either. Damn these companies trying to make money.

Take it a step further: It's all free if you code it yourself! You don't need to spend a single one of your hard earned pennies on another piece of software again!

Chupa Chupa
Jan 22, 2007, 08:28 PM
if they are charging for work that has been put in to develop such prodcut, then i would like to see them justfiy that, cuz even a bunch of am. hackers can do that ... if they are charging just cuz they can, then it says a lot about the character .. doesnt make a whole lot of difference but then atleast the question doesnt stand out form the rest either.

(waiting for the day when someone qoutes my post and goes 'WHY ARE YOU ASKING A QUESTION???!!!!")

Whenever a new product comes, be it a flat panel TV, software, shoes, a song, the respective company has to fund the development costs. The goal is that sales will be good and in short time those costs will be paid off. When that occurs, the company makes a net PROFIT. Yes, they charge for the product because they can i.e., people will pay for it.

Capitalism is about getting people to pay for your product and making lots of money. It makes ZERO difference what a company's motive is for why or what they are charging for a product. It's not a commune, it's a for profit company.

c-Row
Jan 23, 2007, 01:45 AM
Apple did the same thing with iChat A/V. They released it as beta during OS X.2 and then in OS X.3 they offered it as part of the OS and charged users of Jaguar $29.99 to get the entire version IF they wanted to use it.

Yes, I wonder what people's reactions would be if the only way to get Bootcamp was to purchase the whole Leopard package.

"Boooh, those greedy bastards from Cupertino! Make me buy a whole OS just for Bootcamp! Shame on them! I will switch back to Windows now! :mad::mad:"


:rolleyes: Some people you just can't please...

dragula53
Jan 23, 2007, 07:25 AM
I guess since there are free video editing apps out there they shouldn't charge for FCP and since there are free word processors they shouldn't charge for iWork. No one makes you buy it. If it's not something you need than don't buy it stick with your free hacks. Again since diskutil can do it all (even though the functionality is only available via commandline) iPartition shouldn't exist either. Damn these companies trying to make money.

Hey, look.

I am trying to give those folks with grief about paying for boot camp an alternative.

I will be buying leopard (and it's bootcamp) the day it comes out.

That being said,

I think it is crappy that apple is charging $30 for boot camp for tiger users.

I also thought it was crappy that they charged $30 for ichat A/V.

and $30 for quicktime....

and $99 for itools^H^H^H^H^H .mac

I also find it marginally unacceptable that they charge $129 every year for an operating system upgrade.

crucify me.

Additionally, I think that calling refit a hack is pretty offensive. Open source <> free hack. Much of what you so fervently defend is built upon those "free hacks".

uNext
Jan 23, 2007, 09:59 AM
Lol. What a dork? Do you think companies like Dell really make ALL their parts?

omg. :apple:



nO WAY...

And all this time i thought dell was advertising for-intel, ati etc for free.

I mean i always wondered why when you went to configure a computer they listed 3rd party vendors

huh

So stupid of me

I am a dork.

How could i ever live now knowing that my computer does not have a dell chip in it but instead a 3rd party vendor
or is not a dell 3d card or dell hard drive.

Thank you for ruining my day

Earendil
Jan 23, 2007, 11:24 AM
Additionally, I think that calling refit a hack is pretty offensive. Open source <> free hack. Much of what you so fervently defend is built upon those "free hacks".

Not saying one way or the other, but Dictionary.com (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hack) has this for the first definition of "hack": "Computers. to devise or modify (a computer program), usually skillfully."

And than Merriam Webster: (http://m-w.com/dictionary/hack) 4 a : to write computer programs for enjoyment b : to gain access to a computer illegally

And then my favorite definition, which references a time when being called a "hacker" was a huge compliment (crackers were the evil ones), before the media ruined the word :(
UrbanDictionary.com (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=hack):
1. To program a computer in a clever, virtuosic, and wizardly manner. Ordinary computer jockeys merely write programs; hacking is the domain of digital poets. Hacking is a subtle and arguably mystical art, equal parts wit and technical ability, that is rarely appreciated by non-hackers. See hacker.

:apple: Cheers :apple:
~Tyler

hookedonitunes
Jan 24, 2007, 06:42 AM
hey, i love my three apple computers and will surely upgrade to leopard, BUT i dont like ONE BIT that apple now thinks they have to nickel and dime us to death! what next? pay $1.99 for each incremental upgrade from now on? a yearly 'maintenance' charge? that apple is not run by mother theresa's is becoming more apparent, did you know that apple insisted on copy protection for itunes songs even when the artist/label did not?!

a piece of good advice, steve, don't fix something thats not broken.....

Actually, they're not nickel and diming to death. The draft-n specification was not listed as a supported feature on the Macs that shipped with them. Neither was bootcamp. Apple is simply charging for programs that will give new features to the Mac. This is no different than Microsoft charging people for Microsoft Plus (all the way since Windows 95) and no different then Microsoft's recent decision to allow people to upgrade to better editions of Windows Vista (eg Home Premium users can upgrade to Business edition or Ultimate by paying the difference). This is simply a standard business practice, and even I, a poor college student can understand this.

Nym
Jan 24, 2007, 11:57 AM
Ok Ok, I agree with the ones that see no problem in the fact that Apple is going to sell BootCamp for 30$ to Tiger users and really, some people just have to complain all the time which is sad.
Still, there is something that I'm kinda thinking about, which is, on the Apple website in the "switch" section (I think) it specifically says "Macs do Windows too" and it's been a very advertised Intel Mac feature, the thing is, not only tech-maniacs installed the BootCamp beta and Windows in their Mac's (I know a few dumb asses who did it, lol) ,so, what I'm trying to say is that this may be a wrong move for Apple in the sense that "Mac's can do Windows too" (and then add) 30$ for Tiger users! Because a lot of people bought Tiger bundled Intel Mac''s and I can see the confusion here. However, 30$ is virtually nothing for a piece of good software so stop complaining, I ain't rich but I can't complain when someone wants to get paid for it's hard-work. I love my work, but I wouldn't do it for free, I would scratch my nuts all day, it's funnier! :D My 2 cents.