Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Mac OS X Lion Set for July Debut Priced at $29.99, Mac App Store Exclusive

people..

Alexjungle said:
No I meant 'if there is a way'. Anyways it was a joke to all the people whining about everything Apple does.
Click to expand...

god help us.
Apple states that to be ready for Lion you need:
access to the App Store and Snow Leopard is also needed for the OS.

The Mac App Store was only relatively RECENTLY live.

What the hell is Apple thinking by alienating so many users?

wtf?


I never appreciate companies taking he piss out of you.

apple could be turning pear-shaped.
 
dukebound85 said:
But many other things will...such as websites for common things like banking to name a few
Click to expand...
what bank website requires you to have snow leopard or similar?

Saying you need the latest version of firefox or internet explorer is NOT the same as requiring the most up to date OS.
 
xxBURT0Nxx said:
what bank website requires you to have snow leopard or similar?

Saying you need the latest version of firefox or internet explorer is NOT the same as requiring the most up to date OS.
Click to expand...

Yes it is. If a website requires a certain iteration of a browser and that browser is only supported on a certain OS level and above then yes, that site requires that level OS and above by simple deduction
 
Interesting note: If you have an OLD Mac i.e. Intel Core Duo. There's no Lion for you!:( I have three Macs one is an old MacBook with only a Core Duo not the Core 2 Duo, so no update.
It's not really a big deal as I need to dump it any ways as it's to slow for most new software.
As for the bandwidth, if anyone is located in western Canada and on Shaw, no worries. Shaw has just bumped up the bandwidth for regular internet users from 60 GB to 120 GB and extreme users from 120 GB to 250 GB also extreme is running at 25 MBPS (on a good day LOL ) with upload at 2.5 GBPS

My guess is it's tough to be dragged kicking and screaming into the new digital world. :eek:
 
dukebound85 said:
Yes it is. If a website requires a certain iteration of a browser and that browser is only supported on a certain OS level and above then yes, that site requires that level OS and above by simple deduction
Click to expand...
i agree with you that in a sense as software requires the OS, technically the website or whatever does too.... but that's a dumb argument.

It's like saying I am pissed that I can't run Adobe CS5 on my windows 98 machine. Obviously over time old tech has to be cut out to support new tech, it's the way of life.

I don't think any websites are going to stop working if you don't upgrade to Lion, let's be real.
 
Clarity

My only issue is the need to needlessly upgrade OS's through another to get to what you want (Snow Leopard to Lion) It does stink of excessive over-charging.

Terrible planning USA.

Not right on the fans
 
stringent said:
Naa just looks nicer than my handwriting scribble. :)
Click to expand...

Funny side-note, if you order a replacement DVD (which actually cost quite some money) for the Mac OS Install DVD that was bundled with your Mac, you get a burnt DVD-r that has been marked by hand with a regular CD marker. Atleast over here.
 
dukebound85 said:
But many other things will...such as websites for common things like banking to name a few
Click to expand...

I guarantee that no banking website requires above Safari 3, and any one that does would be worth it to upgrade.

Scenario: Safari 6 comes out on OS X Sniffling Kitten and it has the most secure facial recognition banking login system in the world. Your bank decides to get on board and requires it.

This would be a worthy upgrade and the only one I can envision that would cause sites to require upgrade. Most banks still support IE6, come on.
 
Lammergeier said:
My only issue is the need to needlessly upgrade OS's through another to get to what you want (Snow Leopard to Lion) It does stink of excessive over-charging.
Click to expand...
2 OS's at $29 is still cheaper than any windows OS, and cheaper than the usual apple upgrade price of $129, so I'm not sure how you can qualify it as over-charging when it's still the cheapest major OS upgrade you can find right now.

dukebound85 said:
Not right away, no. There will be a time though when support for SL is dropped and Lion will be required
Click to expand...
In 10 years? People are still getting by just fine on tiger and IE 6... the software you use is going to force you to upgrade LONG before a website you visit, come on.
 
sales scum

BURTON: I have not argued the specific costs, but the needlessness of downloading 2 OS's.

I have a Programme you want.. I'm going to let you have it when you buy an older one (you will buy) and then you will buy another one (Lion) straight away.

I hate salesman, I hate up-selling.
Taste?
Oui?
 
ftaok said:
Would the UK government (or agency) really get involved in something like this? Seems like a waste of time and resources.

Apple's not forcing anyone to upgrade to Lion.
Click to expand...

Like Baseball and steroids in the US?

True, they are not forcing anyone to buy Lion, but they are apparently forcing them to buy SL.
 
guess i just don't see why people have to look at things so literally and complain.

From a more figurative standpoint look at it like this.

A Lion upgrade costs the following amount based on your current OS:

Snow Leopard - $29

Tiger/Leopard - $58

I see that you are upset that the upgrade is "double" but it's still half the price of apples usual upgrade fee, and a lot cheaper than a version of windows. And it's not like you are getting screwed, people who paid $29 for SL, still have to pay $29 for Lion, for a total of $58.... the SAME price you have to pay.

I think even if the OS was free people would still find something to complain about!

I remember people saying the same things about Snow Leopard, and then when it came out people realized that you could still upgrade from Tiger with the same disc.
 
xxBURT0Nxx said:
what's the difference... you need apples cd label as a stamp of approval or something?
Click to expand...

I am starting to realize that you are the same kind of person who buys the single user license and installs it on multiple computers or even better, just borrows a disk from a friend.
 
dukebound85 said:
But many other things will...such as websites for common things like banking to name a few
Click to expand...

Since when have websites somehow been dependent upon operating systems? The only risk you run is not being able to update a browser... and as I have an iBook G4, I can assure you that even with an older of iteration of FF I haven't had any problems.
 
sclawis300 said:
I am starting to realize that you are the same kind of person who buys the single user license and installs it on multiple computers or even better, just borrows a disk from a friend.
Click to expand...
since i only have one mac, and have only ever owned one mac at a time... NO.

Seems to me you'd be the one to borrow a disc since you have your panties in such a bunch about a $58 upgrade.... the SAME price all of the rest of us going from leopard > lion paid/will pay.

I guess since you skipped out on using snow leopard though that you have some special entitlement that means you should get it for cheaper than everyone else... :rolleyes:
 
xxburt0nxx said:
since i only have one mac, and have only ever owned one mac at a time... No.

Seems to me you'd be the one to borrow a disc since you have your panties in such a bunch about a $58 upgrade.... The same price all of the rest of us going from leopard > lion paid/will pay.

I guess since you skipped out on using snow leopard though that you have some special entitlement that means you should get it for cheaper than everyone else... :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

why should i have to pay for something to not use it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If I were a thief, I wouldn't care if it cost $20,000 to update, now would I.
 
xxBURT0Nxx said:
I see that you are upset that the upgrade is "double" but it's still half the price of apples usual upgrade fee, and a lot cheaper than a version of windows. And it's not like you are getting screwed, people who paid $29 for SL, still have to pay $29 for Lion, for a total of $58.... the SAME price you have to pay.
Click to expand...

Leopard users need to buy an outdated product (Snow L) to get to Lion. It is nonsensical
 
sclawis300 said:
Not to mention he did not pay $58 to update, he paid $29 to use leopard and then will be paying $29 to use Lion.
Click to expand...

I actually paid $29 to use SNOW leopard, the mac already had leopard on it. And if/when i pay $29 for Lion, I will have paid $58 (unless somehow $29+$29=/=$58 as you apparently seem to think) to upgrade from leopard to lion. You aren't paying any more, nor any less than I did, so what's your point.

I know what you're mad about.... you are going to have to pay the same price as everyone else to upgrade from leopard to lion, but you decided to skip snow leopard thinking it would save you a WHOPPING $29, and now you realize that you missed out on using Snow Leopard for the last year because you didn't actually save money and now you're pissed!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back