Leopard had endless upgrades and patches? Tiger went to 10.4.11, and how many "Security Updates" since then?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Early Snow Leopard Sales More Than Double Those of Leopard
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Leopard had endless upgrades and patches? Tiger went to 10.4.11, and how many "Security Updates" since then?
Service pack ?? this is not Windows buddy. Giving full 64bit support itself justifies it to be an new OS and its much more than that
meh i only got snow leopard cause it was $9.95 for me. didn't see any features i'd actually use and i don't experience any real world speed boosts at all despite what tech reviewers say.
if it was $129, i would have obviously completely skipped over it. anyone whos convinced this isn't any more than a service pack are kidding themselves.
i'm much more excited about windows 7.
if it was $129, i would have obviously completely skipped over it. anyone whos convinced this isn't any more than a service pack are kidding themselves.
i'm much more excited about windows 7.
I don't think I'd be able to live without Spaces, Stacks or Quick Look. Those three features alone have drastically changed how I use (and can use) OSX for the better.
If you can live without them more power to you. But for me Snow Leopard is light-years ahead of Tiger. SL is quick as lightning on my MBP, stable and feature-packed. Could not be happier with the way OSX is going.
EDIT: And I don't believe the person who said Apple could cease development of OSX for a decade and still be ahead of MS was too far off. Not only at the user level, but at the developer level with all the infrastructure of OSX (Core services, Open CL, GCD, Cocoa etc). Windows is heaving under the weight of 20 years of backwards compatibility. If MS were to gut Windows and start from scratch they'd have an awesome OS, as is it's a snail pace of progress due to so much baggage.
Do you believe the same for Win 7? After all, it's simply what Vista should have been just a few years late.
I caouldn't live without them, either. Did wonders for my workflow. Spaces and Quicklook especially. Quicklook is unique, but Spaces is really a no-brainer to have in an OS. It just makes sense. I've got Spaces set to a hot corner, as well as Exposé. Quicklook on the space bar.
AGAIN, where is the logic flawed in the uselessness of comparing OS's in price vs price?
Especially when the total sum of picking up either type of system is pretty much equal, it's down to pure taste and how suitable it is in it's appliance. Is a Mac applicable to my needs? Access to AutoCAD and the performance required is one area where OS X would fail. Boot camp still requires Windows.
Besides where did I claim Microsoft wasn't flawed? I was discussing Apple not having any balls, if anything. At the very best I was claiming Microsoft having the greatest share of the OS market.
Quit misdirecting with your senseless proganda and pay up.
As in regards to your tagline, I have to agree with kernkraft. If Apple could they surely would slow down on the development which is costing them a considerable amount of money. The "fact", as you'd like to call them, they don't is clearly a disproof to your statement. They're not continuing their research & development, wasting large funds just to spite Microsoft, I you ever had that in mind when you wrote it.
Just to be extra clear, when, and if, I turn to Apple I want to know what they're good at. In those cases I don't give a sh*t about Microsoft or what Apple does better, i.e. I'm not going to turn to Volvo when looking to buy a motorcycle (and vice versa of course). In those cases I'm only interested in what Apple does and them alone. If they really are better they can also stand for themselves, no need for smug swings at everyone else. Comparisons are the poor way of saying you want to be better.
Your broad definition of service pack stretches to include many versions of Windows also. By your definition, Windows NT 3.1 is the last true OS sold and everything after it was just a "Service pack".
Of course, that's non-sense, but I do get a vibe that you're not here to discuss apple products.
You know, there are a few of you who, while not saying it, think that SL should have been a free upgrade. Some of you are openly winging that there's no glaring changes. Some are even calling it the equivalent of a service pack.
My arguments? Well, first and foremost: a LOT of work went into the background of the OS. While this is transparent to many users right now that will change. Take GCD for example. It's an impressive piece of programming and tech. Do you think it's free to get teams of developers to work on something that in depth and involved?
Secondly, I'll concede that there's not much noticeable change for your basic, everyday users. Aside from breaking the occasional poorly written app. But you know something? That is the user's individual choice whether to upgrade or not. Apple isn't sitting there saying, "UPGRADE OR YOUR GRANDMA'S BRAINS PAINT THE HALL A NEW SHADE OF GRUESOME!"
Thirdly, Comparing Windows to Mac OS X in terms of release equivalence and business practice similarities is downright ludicrous. As stated elsewhere in this thread, Apple doesn't just produce and sell the software. They sell the whole experience: hardware, software, peripherals.Point out one Windows XP service pack that did all of the following: drastically modified the UI, added new API technology, improved overall performance, and integrated new native technologies.
My last point, in summation, is that Apple is a company. A business. Their main motive is to turn as much of a profit as possible . The problem many people seem to have is that in order to consistently turn a profit you have to either find new revenue streams or constantly create new reasons to generate profits in your current one.
My arguments? Well, first and foremost: a LOT of work went into the background of the OS. While this is transparent to many users right now that will change. Take GCD for example. It's an impressive piece of programming and tech. Do you think it's free to get teams of developers to work on something that in depth and involved?
Secondly, I'll concede that there's not much noticeable change for your basic, everyday users. Aside from breaking the occasional poorly written app. But you know something? That is the user's individual choice whether to upgrade or not. Apple isn't sitting there saying, "UPGRADE OR YOUR GRANDMA'S BRAINS PAINT THE HALL A NEW SHADE OF GRUESOME!"
Thirdly, Comparing Windows to Mac OS X in terms of release equivalence and business practice similarities is downright ludicrous. As stated elsewhere in this thread, Apple doesn't just produce and sell the software. They sell the whole experience: hardware, software, peripherals.Point out one Windows XP service pack that did all of the following: drastically modified the UI, added new API technology, improved overall performance, and integrated new native technologies.
My last point, in summation, is that Apple is a company. A business. Their main motive is to turn as much of a profit as possible . The problem many people seem to have is that in order to consistently turn a profit you have to either find new revenue streams or constantly create new reasons to generate profits in your current one.
Well in one sense, if I pay 29 for a service pack, that pays for the programming time + profits, and perhaps keeps the overall cost of the next os low.
I mean, mebbe free service packs are why new Windows OS's that are worth anything ( not Home, I mean ) run over 200 bucks...
Let's hope so. Full list of $29 is absolutely stupid, in a good way. And I am certain many have and will take advantage of the $25 sale price which popped up soon after it's release.
Unfortunately, Apple eroded much of it's goodwill with it's bumbling itunes 9, one of the saddest entries onto the Mac scene in quite some time.
Unfortunately, Apple eroded much of it's goodwill with it's bumbling itunes 9, one of the saddest entries onto the Mac scene in quite some time.
I must ask what is wrong with iTunes 9 in your opinion, all i have noticed is a colour change to the background of my music in album view and a much easier to navigate iTunes store.
THere's nothing wrong with it at all. It just got better. That column view navigation feature is very nice.
i agree but most people want to try and get everything for all of the bells and whistles...
I haven't tried it yet, but I believe if Rosetta is required, SL will ask you if you want to install it, so it's available.
Does Pages '09 not have feature parity with a 7+ year old version of Word? Not sure why you'd want to run old software like that, but if it aint broke . . .