How the hell is Snow Leopard only $29.99??

Discussion in 'iMac' started by iMacJunkie, Sep 13, 2011.

  1. iMacJunkie macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2011
    #1
    I remember paying at least $200 just to get Windows.

    Is this really how much Snow Leopard costs for the full install version?

    Yeah, since no one has answered my thread, I'm thinking it's impossible to get those beautiful blue scrollbars on Lion, so I'm reverting back to Snow Leopard on my new iMac this weekend.

    http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1228070
     
  2. appleguy123 macrumors 603

    appleguy123

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Location:
    15 minutes in the future
    #2
    Because Microsoft is a software company, and Apple is a hardware company. Apple wants to sell you into an ecosystem that requires hardware purchases. Microsoft wants to sell you their software.
     
  3. GGJstudios macrumors Westmere

    GGJstudios

    Joined:
    May 16, 2008
    #3
    This isn't Windows.
    Yes. It's common knowledge that the price has always been $29.99.
     
  4. iBookG4user macrumors 604

    iBookG4user

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2006
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    #4
    Actually, Snow Leopard has always been $29.00.
     
  5. appleguy123 macrumors 603

    appleguy123

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Location:
    15 minutes in the future
    #5
    That is exactly what he just said...:confused:
     
  6. GGJstudios macrumors Westmere

    GGJstudios

    Joined:
    May 16, 2008
    #6
    Shhh! I'm trying to make a .99 profit here! :D
     
  7. tom vilsack macrumors 68000

    tom vilsack

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2010
    Location:
    ladner cdn
    #7
    can you still go back to snow leopard? i thought like new air's,mini ect you couldn't go backwards.....?

    and yes sl is $29 + $6 ground shipping (i just ordered last week for my late 2006 17" isight imac 2.0)
     
  8. vitzr macrumors 68030

    vitzr

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2011
    Location:
    California
    #8
    Apple could give it away and still profit handsomely.

    They command such a high profit margin on their products they don't have to price it higher. It's well known Apple operates between 30% to 40%, whereas MS & others are hovering around 7% to 11%. That's quite a different.

    Pure proof that Steve was the worlds greatest salesman. Influencing people to part with so much money it's simply amazing. Yes the products are good, but he spun the hype to new heights.

    It's going to be interesting when Apple has to stand on their own sometime in the future.
     
  9. iBookG4user macrumors 604

    iBookG4user

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2006
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    #9
    Take a look at the last two numbers.



    Then I didn't say anything! :D
     
  10. appleguy123 macrumors 603

    appleguy123

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Location:
    15 minutes in the future
    #10
    Ahh. I think I've been trained by retailers to just ignore the .99¢. I should round up, but I mentally round down.
     
  11. iBookG4user macrumors 604

    iBookG4user

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2006
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    #11
    As long as the computers shipped with Snow Leopard initially then you can upgrade to Snow Leopard.
     
  12. Nermal Moderator

    Nermal

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2002
    Location:
    New Zealand
    #12
    Then the retailers have won!
     
  13. disconap macrumors 68000

    disconap

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2005
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #13
    I may be extremely tired (ok, I am extremely tired), but this made no sense to me whatsoever.
     
  14. tom vilsack macrumors 68000

    tom vilsack

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2010
    Location:
    ladner cdn
    #14
    me thinks it's way to late...i read his a couple times and was ...wtf...
     
  15. Nermal Moderator

    Nermal

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2002
    Location:
    New Zealand
    #15
    It's just a typo. If the computer originally shipped with 10.6 (such as the current MBPs) then you can install 10.6, even if your particular machine came with 10.7.
     
  16. iBookG4user macrumors 604

    iBookG4user

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2006
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    #16
    I guess it could be inferred as a typo. But by computer shipping with Snow Leopard initially it was meant that when the computer was released Snow Leopard was the current OS. And if upgrade was misunderstood, it was a jive at Lion.
     
  17. pawtracks macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2009
    Location:
    Phoenix, AZ
    #17
    Not "easily" In all cases.
    I have seen quite a few 2011 MacBook pros recently that will not boot from a 10.6 retail DVD but only a specific 2011 MacBook Pro 10.6 specific build.

    These computers shipped with Lion but the users are using some specific DJ software that is not yet ready for Lion and forced to downgrade to SL.
     
  18. iBookG4user macrumors 604

    iBookG4user

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2006
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    #18
    This is because the retail disk might have come out before the MacBook Pro did. Thus the retail disk would not have the drivers for the MacBook Pro.
     
  19. Nermal Moderator

    Nermal

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2002
    Location:
    New Zealand
    #19
    Aha! So not a typo :)
     
  20. Confuzzzed macrumors 68000

    Confuzzzed

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2011
    Location:
    Liverpool, UK
    #20
    Until 10.7.2 comes out to hopefully solve all the 10.7 and 10.7.1 bugs, I would side with 10.6 any day of the week. Beautiful OS
     
  21. Smacky macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2008
    #21
    Seriously SL was just like a few performance tweaks for Leopard. No new features that would warrant paying any more. And Lion, pfft if anything its less reliable than SL ever was.
     
  22. Confuzzzed macrumors 68000

    Confuzzzed

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2011
    Location:
    Liverpool, UK
    #22
    performance tweaks enough to significantly speed up my machine and allow most of the third party software I use to grow with the new platform. Which sadly can not be said for Lion which is full of bugs and third party applications have problems lets just say
     
  23. jayhawk11 macrumors 6502a

    jayhawk11

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2007
    #23
    You're mad that a 7 week old OS doesn't have every bug ironed out and third parties haven't gotten off their asses to update applications?

    ----------

    I've never understood this sentiment. 10.6 was one of the most stable OS's I have ever used.
     
  24. GFLPraxis macrumors 604

    GFLPraxis

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2004
    #24
    Apple used to charge $129 for new OS's. I think the real key is that in Snow Leopard and Lion they introduced a lot of newer design paradigms...Grand Central Dispatch, OpenCL, all the iOS-like stuff in Lion, and they're willing to take a hit on profit margin to get those newer features standardized upon. They want users to all be on Lion and developers to be targeting Lion. Better experience for all, which sells more hardware via word of mouth and reviews.

    It also encourages developers to hop between iOS and Mac OS X as they get more similar.
     
  25. AppleNewton macrumors 68000

    AppleNewton

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Location:
    1 Finite Place
    #25
    Lion is more than 7 weeks old, its been in development long enough that a public release should be mostly clear of major issues.
     

Share This Page