Lion is actually too expensive

Discussion in 'Mac OS X Lion (10.7)' started by mark28, Aug 5, 2011.

  1. macrumors 68000

    Jan 29, 2010
    Linux does everything that Lion can do.

    Launchpad, autosave, fullscreen apps, expose / mission control, App store,
    It's all there in Linux.

    So the new features of Lion are hardly new and have been done before for Linux which is free.
  2. macrumors P6


    Jul 17, 2005
    5045 feet above sea level
    oh yes, linux is just like osx:rolleyes:
  3. macrumors regular


    Sep 1, 2009
    Cheshire, UK
    My car starts, stops, turns left and turns right but that doesn't make it more expensive than a Ferrari.
  4. macrumors 68020

    Feb 19, 2011
  5. macrumors member

    Apr 25, 2011
    No, you have it backwards. Why waste your time with Linux, when Lion can do everything Linux can?

    Linux can't run Adobe products, so your premise is false. And if you are buying a Mac, Lion is free. If you just like free stuff, have some of these:
    :) :confused: :eek: :mad: :rolleyes: :cool: :D ;) :p :eek: :( Might have to charge for this . . . :apple:
  6. macrumors 6502a


    Sep 16, 2003
    Linux is free ? Really ?
  7. macrumors 6502a

    Apr 15, 2010
    good for you. may i recommend ubuntu for your use?
  8. macrumors 6502a


    Dec 10, 2009
    United Kingdom
    Linux is great, if you want a project. When I want to tinker, I install Linux and spend the next week trying to get it to act like OS X. Then, I come to the realise that in the time spent fiddling with Ubuntu, I could have researched and written an 8000-word article and maybe even found an answer to the whole problem of world hunger. Linux is pretty amazing, and I don't want to take away from that, but from an operational standpoint, it's a hobby like trying to fix up a classic car over the course of a few years.
  9. macrumors 68000

    Mar 26, 2008
    I know this feels like a troll thread, but it is also incorrect.

    Let me know when Linux can natively run the following applications. No substitutions, VMs or other emulation allowed. I need (or just want) these specific applications. Look-alikes aren't acceptable because they're not compatible enough. Only then will it be just like OS X.

    Aperture/Lightroom (okay, aperture is OS X only, so Lightroom mentioned)
    iTunes (the store is important, so it's not just for media playback)
    TurboTax/H&R Block
    iWork/Office (iWork is OS X only, so Office is okay, too)
    Civilization 5

    Again, emulation/VM is not acceptable. If I can't run the apps I need natively on the OS, then the OS itself is not useful to me.
  10. macrumors 6502a

    Jerome Morrow

    Jun 13, 2011
    United Kingdom
    Mediocre ar best.
  11. thread starter macrumors 68000

    Jan 29, 2010
    These reactions are funny here. The upgrade from SL --> Lion could have been free as a server pack and I'm not the only one with this opinion.

    The new features that were added in the upgrade from SL --> Lion are not that special when looking at other OS's which are free. I stand by my opinion that Lion could have been a free server pack.
  12. Moderator


    Staff Member

    May 3, 2009
    From an OS perspective perhaps, though I'm unfamilar with the auto-save feature. Please detail which distro does that?

    An operating system's main function is to provide the ability to run programs and that's where Linux falls short of OSX. The depth and breadth of apps available to Linux pales in comparison to OSX. There is no app AFAIK that offers non-destructive editing of images. Gimp compared to PS or pixelmator is a GUI nightmare,etc.

    Upgrading linux can be fraught with headaches as well. I've dealt with it enough to know that OSX has this one feature over Linux by light years.
  13. Administrator emeritus


    Jan 15, 2006
    The Kop
    Talk about a roundabout way to make your point. This is a totally different point to the one you started the thread with.
  14. macrumors 68040


    Sep 24, 2010
    Why don't you delete your original post and put this there.

    Still wrong but at least it had a point.
  15. macrumors member

    Jul 28, 2011
    A) you're clearly trying to start a never-ending, and already mentioned about 876776 times on here mind you, war.

    B) Why aren't more people jumping to buy it then if it's so holy and cheaper? End scene.
  16. macrumors regular

    Sep 9, 2008
    First off, we don't get free service packs. Those are for windows users and quite frankly, never add as much functionality as a new version of Mac OS X. We get free upgrades for all version numbers 10.7.x all the way until 10.8 or whatever is realeased. Those are your "service packs" that fix bugs and add smaller new features similar to the service packs (which you generally only get one or two of) in windows.

    Linux upgrades are free, and generally the add as much functionality as an upgrade from SL to Lion did, or Tiger to Leopard if you like that analogy better.

    The fact of the matter is, that if Lion's new features aren't worth the 30 dollars they charge for it, then I don't know what is. I would much rather pay 30 dollars for a new operating system with new features and full time support than get a free Linux upgrade that I have to support and upgrade components by myself, and I even like Linux for tinkering with.
  17. macrumors 68000

    Aug 20, 2010
    Oh yeah, Linux focuses on the user experience. :rolleyes:
  18. macrumors 6502a

    Jerome Morrow

    Jun 13, 2011
    United Kingdom
    Compared to that 'experience' Lion is priceless :)
  19. macrumors regular

    Jul 17, 2011
    Good for you. Nobody is stopping you from using Linux then.
  20. macrumors 6502a

    Apr 18, 2011
    I used Linux for 6 years before switching to OSX. It's a good OS for 90% of what computers are used for, but it is not OSX by any means. I used Linux for two reasons, Microsoft pissed me off after 15 + years of use and it was free. Like Android, there are tons of free apps out there for Linux. Those apps are, in general, not the quality of the apps you can get on a Mac. Sure, the apps on OSX cost money, but they work without having to spend hours screwing with them. If you feel that Linux is better than OSX, and it's free, the choice for you is clear. I work on Windows and Linux machines for my job all the time, when I get home, I just want something that does what I want with minimal hassle.
  21. macrumors 6502

    May 6, 2008
    Don't get me wrong, I run an Ubuntu Server, rebuild old machines with Ubuntu and really like linux on the whole, but you're rather incorrect with this statement.

    Linux can't run any of my programs I use to get work done, such as Ableton Live, Logic Studio, VDMX, Pro Tools etc.

    It also can't run many of my personal apps, like iTunes (yes, it can run the windows version with WINE, but not very well), though there are versions of Chrome, FileZilla, VLC, Handbrake, Skype,, Spotify and Steam (soon enough!), but on the whole it's not a proper mainstream OS yet, not until proper commercial applications are being developed for it.
  22. macrumors 6502a

    Mar 23, 2008
    Brooklyn, NY
    Excellent point. And imagine what else you can do with that $29.99!
  23. macrumors G4


    Feb 5, 2009
    Desktop Linux and "user experience" is great . . . if your standards are low enough.

    Let's leave the 3rd world operating systems to their respective "developing" markets and get with the times.

    I used Linux for about 2 years, between 2004 and 2006. It became readily apparent why it's free. A fun experiment and a learning process. That's about it.

    Not buy a state of the art operating system that is the highest iteration of a consumer OS?
  24. macrumors 65816


    Nov 17, 2010

Share This Page