"You are being charged up the rear for standard hardware components no different from the components found in a much cheaper PC. Confirm by entering your password below..."
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.
Microsoft Matches Snow Leopard Price With Windows 7, But Only for Students
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
"You are being charged up the rear for standard hardware components no different from the components found in a much cheaper PC. Confirm by entering your password below..."
Woah, wait. So only the Professional version will have XP compatibility mode?!?
I'm not saying Apple isn't making money. I'm saying they aren't making money on Snow Leopard sales. Of course, some of the sales of a new mac is accounted for in the cost of developing the OS. But there is a reason that Apple usually charges $129 for OS upgrades, and this time they didn't.
It isn't like they bumped the costs of all their hardware $100 over the last couple of years to make up the difference.
With reference to Final Cut, they are also selling bundled iLife and iWork suites without SL style enhancements. I know Final Cut is yet upgraded to make use of SL technologies, that isn't what I said. What I said was that in the future they will be, and because of that, there is a significant possibility that the user experience will be a lot better than it could have been otherwise.
BTW - I'm not opening my mouth, I'm typing. I don't generally type with my mouth open.
I hadn't heard that. It does make things a little better for MS. But it would still mean you might have to "reinstall" windows to switch from 32 to 64 bit kernel. Suboptimal, but probably acceptable.
Wait, what... You're imagining things? I had a feeling you were crazy.
In my first reply to your post, I said "Pretty much you have two choices now." Which is something I still stand behind.
Either Home Premium or Professional. Ultimate has no real benefit over Professional, unless you're looking for Server functionality... and then you should look into Windows Server 2008 R2. (There's Snow Leopard Server too, in case you didn't know.)
Starter is only sold to OEMs. You can't upgrade to it. I said it "might be for netbooks" not that it would ever make it to market here. I mean, Microsoft (and consumers) would probably rather see Home Premium on Netbooks.
Your whole x64 and x86 thing is crap, since every retail box includes both. Check Amazon from now on before you spout your misinformation.
Also, the REASON behind providing both x86 and x64 is a logical one. Compatibility. It's a problem several of my apps had when I switched to Snow Leopard. Sure, most ran fine in 32-bit mode... but a lot still haven't been updated with 64-bit support. Windows is all about legacy compatibility (which is what adds to the bloat and most of its flaws). I've run 64-bit Windows since Vista... and I've never had any issue. At least Microsoft GAVE users the choice. Rather than forcing them to stick with 32-bit, and then forcing them to pay for a 64-bit version in the next release. (Like Apple did.)
Microsoft's offered 64-bit since XP. Hence why Vista's 64-bit was decent, and why Windows 7's 64-bit shouldn't give anyone any major issues.
The 64-bit version of Vista and Windows 7 will load 32-bit applications, no problem. The real issue with 64-bit Windows XP was lack of drivers.
Clearly, that cuts your choices back down to:
Home Premium
Professional
Ultimate (which, as I've said... if you want those extra features, look into Windows 2008 Server R2)
And thus, for consumers (who probably don't give a damn about servers), you get:
Home Premium
Professional
The problem is that Microsoft cannot simplify anything without making a major change in how it works at a fundamental level. So simply copying registry keys over would probably cause a BSD equivalent in Windows 7.
I for one think it is hilarious that Microsoft thinks it can recoup its user losses in the college student age range. I have been running a Windows 7 RC copy for 3 months, and it has been pretty frustrating anytime I decide I want to install an older program. Not that this is atypical for any previous Windows version, it just hasn't improved any (shocker
). As a result, I have not used it that much (except to find ways to make it crash, also not that hard to do). It is sad because their marketing campaign will probably work, people will start complaining, and no one at Microsoft will give a rip. They just can't seem to get the point that restricting features and half a$# coding is ludicrous and will drive the intelligent users away. Maybe that's their goal. Market to the sub 100 IQ and leave the 101+ to Apple. That would reduce the complaints.Heck, only Xserves load into Snow Leopard's 64-bit kernel by default. If I want the 64-bit kernel... I have to hold 6+4 on boot. Suboptimal? I think so.
However, it's probably a good decision by Apple to default to 32-bit on most systems... Since, well, driver support isn't great for Apple's 64-bit kernel since it just came out. Try running 64-bit Snow Leopard with NTFS-3g, for example.
64-bit support for Windows 7 is something you shouldn't really have to worry about. They've worked on 64-bit support since XP. It sucked on XP, was better for Vista... There's no real reason to switch to the 32-bit kernel. Unless you have some really rare hardware or something that only runs under the 32-bit kernel. But maybe you'd just be better off upgrading that piece of outdated hardware.
Speaking of outdated hardware... Snow Leopard only runs on Macs released since 2006.
Even following your argument, there are still more choices for Windows users than Apple users. And that is a bad thing since most people end up needing random features intermittently on their home based computer that are only available on the "professional" version.
As a side note, all my applications run find after the snow leopard upgrade. Cannot say the same thing on any previous windows upgrade.
Yep. But don't worry. Pretty much all of your applications should run fine. I've never even loaded XP compatibility mode. 32-bit applications will install to "Program Files (x86)" on 64-bit Windows, and they still load just as well as they did before.
In any case, it's essentially just an XP virtual machine that runs in the background when you need to run legacy applications. (Or you're just feeling like running a particular application in XP... for whatever reason.)
not that I disagree, but why not instead offer a single version of the OS with all features included on the disk, then at the point of installation allow the user to decide what they want included on their computer and/or to go with suggested settings based on the capabilities of their hardware? no, that doesn't make any sense, let's just offer a half-dozen astronomically-overpriced crippled versions and an even more over-priced seventh version that installs all the options regardless of whether you want or need all of them... thanks, but I'll take my streamlined, fully-customizable Snow Leopard install disc/process over this malarky any day.
(as a disclaimer, I'm not anti-Windows, but Microsoft just can't seem to break the habit of making a joke out of their OS releases)
You shouldn't really. It's primary focus is for businesses running legacy applications. You know, stuff that hasn't been updated since 2000 or something.
For the average consumer, XP compatibility mode is pretty much useless. You even need specific Intel processors to use it. (which is a issue people were finding out with their Sony VAIOs... the processor should have supported it, but Sony disabled it for one reason or another)
I haven't tested it on my MBP... but I'd assume it works.
Just ordered my copy... (Nice that I'm in Grad School and can get stuff like this cheap. )
I just wish installation wouldn't be such a NIGHTMARE in that you have to install an older version first since it's just the Upgrade edition...
WHY MS can't get with the program and consolidate into a single version that is always a full version CD that can either do a clean or upgrade install (like, oh, OSX does) I don't know... Idiots.
)I just wish installation wouldn't be such a NIGHTMARE in that you have to install an older version first since it's just the Upgrade edition...
WHY MS can't get with the program and consolidate into a single version that is always a full version CD that can either do a clean or upgrade install (like, oh, OSX does) I don't know... Idiots.
And this is why there's the "Windows Anytime Upgrade." As I've said... each retail disc contains ALL the data needed for any version. So if you purchased Home Premium for $120 (which is less than Snow Leopard's $169 Mac Box price -- if you're a Tiger user... which would probably be the equivalent of an XP upgrade) but decided you need the $200 Professional version, you can pay the difference and Microsoft gives you a new key.
You then insert your Windows 7 DVD... and it installs all the features from Professional. Besides, for consumers that don't know what version to get... They would probably be fine with Home Premium. People that would use Professional's features would probably know that they need Professional. The average Windows user is not the average Mac user... They're not completely clueless.
Also, what applications didn't run for you in Windows 7? I'm curious.
I am a bit disappointed that I can't run 64-bit kernel mode for Snow Leopard (which isn't even enabled by default, despite being an advertised feature) because NTFS-3g and MacFuse haven't been updated.
I have a 3 yr old iMac that running SL that is faster now than when I had Tiger on it. I also have a 5 yr old powerbook that I can't run SL on, so I know about SL compatibility with Intel only hardware.
That's the difference between Apple and Microsoft. Apple will switch platforms and will carry support for older systems forward up to a point, and then stop when it stops making financial sense to support that hardware.
Microsoft feels obligated to carry forward old technologies even when no one else is still using them. Witness Visual Studio 2010 and its incredibly poor performance that much of the VS team has publicly stated is due to the requirement that they still support old antiquated technologies.
It's a trade-off. Apple's strategy is to cut ties after a "reasonable" time has passed so they can move forward quicker. Microsoft would rather support everything they've ever produced so as not to alienate anyone.
You obviously prefer Microsoft's strategy, I don't fault that. But Apple wouldn't be Apple if they tried to adopt that strategy. So I for one am glad they don't.
Then contribute to those projects. I'm sure you could get them going!
You appear to be new here so I'll assume you're genuinely confused by this and not intentionally trying to stir up trouble.
I've been following this site for many years and big headlines about direct competitors to Apple's most popular products have appeared on page 1 for as long as I've been around. I'm not sure what Arn's criteria is for which stories make it there, but it's nothing new and certainly is not troll bait. You should probably lurk for a while at get a feel for the site before jumping in with this kind of reaction.
Just ordered my copy... (Nice that I'm in Grad School and can get stuff like this cheap.
I just wish installation wouldn't be such a NIGHTMARE in that you have to install an older version first since it's just the Upgrade edition...
WHY MS can't get with the program and consolidate into a single version that is always a full version CD that can either do a clean or upgrade install (like, oh, OSX does) I don't know... Idiots.
The reason behind that is simple: Upgrade is for upgrades only. They don't want you buying a Mac (without Windows installed) and then buying Windows 7 Pro Upgrade, because you haven't paid the same licensing fees as other Windows users.
Apple, on the other hand, uses the same install for both upgrade and non-upgrade versions. Since you NEED Apple hardware to install it on. Apple doesn't really care, then, if you install Snow Leopard upgrade on a Tiger machine. (I mean, maybe they care a _little_ bit... but you've still purchased an Intel Mac... so I'm sure they don't hate you too much for it.) It's not that they trust you, but that they don't care.
Right. I like the stability of OS X. I'm not putting it down. I'm just saying, as you have, that Microsoft and Apple are inherently different.
Apple is hardware. Microsoft is software. Microsoft wants to keep business users happy (you know, the people that they make the most money from)... but a lot of big businesses are unfortunately using legacy software, so they can't just drop support for it.
My point was simply this: Apple WANTS people to buy more hardware. Look at the latest iPod event. iPod nano saw a huge update... since, well, it hasn't really changed much (with the 4th gen, they seemed to revert to the 2nd gen design). Meanwhile, the iPod touch didn't receive a camera, probably because Apple wants iPod touch users to also purchase an iPod nano. (hence their comparison of the iPod nano to the Flip Mino camera) Next year we'll probably see an iPod touch with a camera.
Hence Snow Leopard dropping PPC support.
Microsoft wants people to buy more software, obviously. They don't really make anything off of hardware sales.
The applications are some proprietary ones that were made for XP (in 2003). They are not available to the public. They ran ok in compatibility mode, but still had intermittent errors that I never had in XP.
Why do you need 64 bit on a Mac? Everything I have works fine in 32 bit. Snow Leopard made them work faster, even in 32 bit. I booted my Mac in 64 bit as a test and only one application did not work. I didn't notice any significant performance increase. That is quite a bit different than my experience with Microsoft's first attempt in XP, and even in Vista. I expect point updates in 10.6 will address many more compatibility issues. What applications didn't work for you in 64 bit mode?
Yeah right - MS is tanking as we speak. Releasing Win7 at inflated prices is going to be the final coffin nail.
LOL!
I really don't understand this blind MS hatred among the mac sheep. Does what they do diminish your OSX experience in any way?
Unlike Apple, MS doesn't sell the PC's their OS runs on you dolt. And yeah, I'm sure the board at Apple is "eating into their pile of cash" and doing this out of the goodness of their hearts. You obviously don't own any investment stock. LOL!
Apple basically takes what Windows users consider a service pack, sprinkles an icy slurpee on a spotted cat, puts a "zero" in the release number and magically it's worth $30.
Any facts to back up this self proclaimed nonsense? As an Apple shareholder I've got plenty to debunk this.
I'm an avid OSX user but this Apple worship and "MS is Satan" mantra is just freaking scary. I'll never understand it. When Windows7 is released, my mac will work the same as it did the day before. If it starts to erode Apple's puny market share (and it will) then that only means Apple will make OSX better for me and much sooner. If anything, you misguided macheads should be singing praises to any company that puts pressure on Apple to do things cheaper, smarter and faster for their end users.
Sorry (and I did read the article, thankyouverymuch), when I was editing my comment to rearrange my words, I must have deleted the word "students."
In any case, my main point is that it's clear the price is no coinicidence.
Sorry. I'm not a misguided machead. I work in .Net every day. I get Microsoft strategy, and I don't hate windows. I just think that Windows 7 is overpriced. SL and Windows 7 are both "maintenance releases". Apple's priced theirs accordingly. Microsoft didn't.
I don't own Apple stock or Microsoft stock. But I have a lot of reasons that I want Microsoft to do well. Overpricing an OS upgrade (that I would like to see gain broad acceptance, so I could rely on it being installed on most of my users hardware) doesn't help that.
sooooo they still dont get it?
Well to me atleast.....still all these different versions?
just throw one release out and upon install can choose their poison...or something.
a half assed attempt to match snow leopard at the least lol.
Well to me atleast.....still all these different versions?
just throw one release out and upon install can choose their poison...or something.
a half assed attempt to match snow leopard at the least lol.