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.
Why is Mavericks free?
- Thread starter pilkenton
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
They are trying to convince people to upgrade from Snow Leopard. With the event, Apple showed that they don't really need to charge for software.
I think they want to move as many over to Mavs as possible since it leverages sales of not just Macs but iOS devices as well. That's where the real profit is. A few millions doesn't really matter to Apple.
Apple customers pay a premium for Apple product when compared to any other brand... In a way you can say that we are paying for it.
But if you want a straight answer, then, it is publicity. In my opinion.
Anyone would have paid the 20 $ in a heartbeat, no doubt.
"Free is good." My guess would be that Apple doesn't make a significant amount from OS X sales vs. hardware. Free software won't affect revenue much.
Apple don't make consumer software for a profit, anymore ( if they ever did... at most cover the costs of development?) They sell hardware, the software is to entice people to become Apple customers.
The more people who are on the latest and greatest OSX the better - Apple don't have to worry about supporting older versions of OSX - all machines that can run ML can run Mavericks.
The more people who are on the latest and greatest OSX the better - Apple don't have to worry about supporting older versions of OSX - all machines that can run ML can run Mavericks.
I think when they started to develop 10.9, they didn't wanted it to be what it is now. You already know they had to move developers to iOS and such... And if you start to look into the details of the UI, you can see that it's not finished. (some apps have old UI while some are have new UI & there is a new font on some rare places, and those fonts doesn't even look right there & menubar shade bug at the right corner when you open notification center & just look at launchpad, they kept old iOS style and modified it into some transparent thing, it looks cheap)
So I think they don't want money for something that isn't actually finished properly.
So I think they don't want money for something that isn't actually finished properly.
I was expecting to pay $20 but pleased with free. They got their money from me though because I bought pages with the saved money. I'm disappointed that pages has been dumbed down though. I have had pages on my iPad for a long time, and I was hoping for something more powerful. At least now I can access my cloud documents. I do have MS Office for serious work though. It's shameful that Apple can't roll their own office apps that are serious competition for Microsoft.
Oh, and I'm not disappointed with Mav, it works better for me than 10.8.5 ever did.
Oh, and I'm not disappointed with Mav, it works better for me than 10.8.5 ever did.
Last edited:
1. Adds value to the Mac hardware purchase.
2. Encourages people to stay up to date. Fewer OS versions in use is better for developers.
3. Annoys "other" software manufacturers based in Redmond.
I think making it free was a smart move. It makes the Apple ecosystem more appealing and more sticky for consumers. From Apple's point of view, the lost software revenue is likely more than made up for by the new hardware sales encouraged by the appeal of free OS upgrades, free productivity, and free lifestyle apps. Free is always a great marketing too.
Plus, it makes them look really good when everyone upgrades to the newest OS, and it looks even batter if the new OS gives older systems a little speed and battery bump, because that locks in people to continue buying Apple products. When was the last time a Windows upgrade gave old systems a speed/battery boost, even a minuscule one.
Plus, it makes them look really good when everyone upgrades to the newest OS, and it looks even batter if the new OS gives older systems a little speed and battery bump, because that locks in people to continue buying Apple products. When was the last time a Windows upgrade gave old systems a speed/battery boost, even a minuscule one.
swingerofbirch
macrumors 68040
Their new iLife and iWork apps require Mavericks. They don't make money off of iLife, as I suppose anyone who has a Mac can upgrade to the new versions for free (not sure about older versions of iLife), but with iWork, they can't charge new customers for the applications unless they're on Mavericks. Could be a reason, probably not the reason.
Also, I feel as if much of Mavericks improvements are under the hood. What Apple is offering as new user features are largely things that other players provide for free on the Web. For example, Maps is something that you can get the equivalent of for free on the Web. iBooks is something that is already free on iOS, and the idea that Apple would make you pay money in order to get iBooks you've already paid for onto your Mac might not go over well with people. Amazon doesn't charge so that you can get Kindle on iOS or on the Mac. And Apple may also have an interest in more people buying iBooks (although, to be honest, I can't see many people buying iBooks on the Mac).
Finally, I think in the old days, Mountain Lion and Mavericks might not have warranted a whole point update. I sort of look at both Mountain Lion and Mavericks as big .1 updates for Lion.
Also, I feel as if much of Mavericks improvements are under the hood. What Apple is offering as new user features are largely things that other players provide for free on the Web. For example, Maps is something that you can get the equivalent of for free on the Web. iBooks is something that is already free on iOS, and the idea that Apple would make you pay money in order to get iBooks you've already paid for onto your Mac might not go over well with people. Amazon doesn't charge so that you can get Kindle on iOS or on the Mac. And Apple may also have an interest in more people buying iBooks (although, to be honest, I can't see many people buying iBooks on the Mac).
Finally, I think in the old days, Mountain Lion and Mavericks might not have warranted a whole point update. I sort of look at both Mountain Lion and Mavericks as big .1 updates for Lion.
It's certainly "one in the eye" for a certain company in Redmond which has been charging ridiculous amounts for their software AND imposing ridiculous restrictions on its use and installation - for decades!
well apple is really the only computer manufacturer that offers both hardware and software developed to work so closely together. they've made their final move into the OS being just another feature of the hardware.
To get more people on Mavericks, which will transmit all your data/keystrokes directly to the NSA. Duh...
Enthusiast,
You're so right. They're making so much on iOS devices, even companies making apps seem to be deving iOS first, and putting OSX on the back burner. One example I can think of off the top of my head is "Mail Pilot" a very sweet, and innovative mail program, nicest I've ever seen. The OSX desktop version just hit beta, and they're looking for testers. Anyone can sign up. But the point here being for the mobile devices it's already signed off and in use. WTF!!!!
Slide023
P.S. For those who have not checked it out, please do. It is going to be very sweet.
This.
None of the new features in Mavericks, when you remove RDF and REALLY look at them, are worth charging for. Windows PCs have included most of these features for years. When Apple announced Mavericks and detailed its features, I remember thinking to myself, "Does Apple really think charging for Mavericks is a good idea?" I'm happy they decided to release it for free.
Droid,
You may not be far off the mark. I like Mavs (except the damn beach balls) but there is nothing that simply blows you away about Mavericks. I only use my battery once a month to maintain it's health.
Slide023