Why won't Apple let you buy Snow Leopard via a download?

[tekio]

I'd rather download it, would only take 2 hours to download during the night.

Not all recent Macs feature DVD burners (especially not Dual Layer ones).

I don't have a dvd burner so I'd install it from a usb drive, like I do now with leopard.

Having it for download will make no difference to pirates, snow leopard will be pirated easily anyway.

As long as apple gives the option of downloading or getting a disk I don't see the problem with a download option.

 

[pdjudd]

As long as apple gives the option of downloading or getting a disk I don't see the problem with a download option.

Its hard to justify keeping servers alive for a download that is 6 gigs in size. Insuring QOS for such a large download is a big investment that most consumers will never exploit. DVD's are already needed and so printing them out is simply cheaper.

We are not at that point yet.

 

[tekio]

Even if apple didn't have the hardware to support it, there's always options like amazon s3.

Although considering apple already serve 2gb+ dmg's for anybody to download, I wouldn't imagine the limited number of downloads would be a huge problem.

 

[cmaier]

Its hard to justify keeping servers alive for a download that is 6 gigs in size. Insuring QOS for such a large download is a big investment that most consumers will never exploit. DVD's are already needed and so printing them out is simply cheaper.

We are not at that point yet.

The title of the thread - "why won't apple LET you buy..." frames the issue the wrong way; people are acting like it would be no trouble at all for Apple to enable this, and it's all some dastardly plot to limit our options.

Apple can't even keep mobile me running smooth, and when they released iphone os 3.0 their systems were impossible to get on. They simply don't yet have the infrastructure (maybe that's part of what their new data center is about) to deal with this, and, despite what people think, it's a small percentage of the population that prefers the "spend a few hours downloading, then burn a dvd" route.

 

[thegoldenmackid]

Even if apple didn't have the hardware to support it, there's always options like amazon s3.

Although considering apple already serve 2gb+ dmg's for anybody to download, I wouldn't imagine the limited number of downloads would be a huge problem.

Product launches mean that there will be a massive rush. It would take forever.

 

[cmaier]

Even if apple didn't have the hardware to support it, there's always options like amazon s3.

Although considering apple already serve 2gb+ dmg's for anybody to download, I wouldn't imagine the limited number of downloads would be a huge problem.

You have a small imagination. There's a huge difference between those downloads and an OS - with the OS upgrade, everyone will be trying to download AT ONCE.

 

[stuffradio]

No, that would be ridiculous.

Also, it would only increase the ability for users to pirate.

You have no idea how easy it is to pirate, do you? You don't need Apple to let you download the ISO or dmg or whatever to make it so you can pirate OS X.

How would you store it? On your HDD? or would you burn it? How would apple prevent you from burning copies for all of your friends. Also, a 6 GB download is crazy. It takes a good while on a torrent connection, let alone from a dedicated server

Store it on your HDD/SDD, maybe put it on your flash drive or something (I have an 8 GB USB Stick), etc. etc.

It would take me maybe only 2-3 hours to download 6GB.

1) Most people do not have access to download speeds that can accommodate a 6 gigabyte file reliably nor do capped ISP's like the idea either. Apple is not an ISP so their internet capabilities mean little. Its just not viable for most customers.

Most people do have access to download speeds that can accomodate a 6 GB file reliably. It's 2009, I don't know if I know anyone who has an internet connection not fast enough.

2) Without DRM, piracy would be rampant.

It's easy with or without DRM to pirate OS X. It doesn't take a genius to find a DVD of OS X.

3) The installer needs exclusive access to the drive - physical media comes into place anyway. That means that every Mac Owner is going to need at the least, a blank dual-layer burner. Not every Mac owner has one.

Or a USB drive or something.

4) Microsoft only distributes its software to consumers via disc.

You don't know anything, this is false.
Windows 7 is a good example of your knowledge being false. You have the option to buy Windows 7 as a download.

Same goes for Microsoft, they only allow software downloads to businesses or educational institutions that can take smaller downloads. I think the only exception is the RC's. Those tend to get distributed in smaller numbers though.

Again, you are false. You are stating this as fact when you don't back it up. I can download their software from their website on my home computer.

 

[tekio]

You have a small imagination. There's a huge difference between those downloads and an OS - with the OS upgrade, everyone will be trying to download AT ONCE.

There's also a lot less people with connections capable of downloading 6gb compared to 2gb. The number of downloads is going to be nothing compared to how many downloads there were of windows 7 rc.

 

[Plutonius]

Well, it doesn't seem to bother Microsoft and the various Linux providers, does it?

Microsoft requires you to enter the software serial number when you install, ties that serial number to your motherboard, and stores all the info at Microsoft. Unless things have changed from Leopard to SL, you have to enter the software serial number but it doesn't tie it to the motherboard. (I.E. Microsoft has anti-piracy measures that prevent it from being installed on more then one machine).

I would much rather buy a physical OSX media then put up with a Microsoft type DRM.

 

[cmaier]

There's also a lot less people with connections capable of downloading 6gb compared to 2gb. The number of downloads is going to be nothing compared to how many downloads there were of windows 7 rc.

Apple's servers crapped out just serving major iPhone OS updates, which are much smaller. Apple is also a much smaller company than Microsoft.

I don't even see the reason for wanting this, frankly.

 

[stuffradio]

Microsoft requires you to enter the software serial number when you install, ties that serial number to your motherboard, and stores all the info at Microsoft.

Where did you read that :S

It doesn't seem to happen with me? They just store if the cd key is activated on a computer or not.

 

[weckart]

4) Microsoft only distributes its software to consumers via disc.

Negative. Vista Upgrade Anytime was offered as a download. I would not recommend it, or any other substantial download without the guarantee of a repeat download if the first one craps out. This happened to a PC Mag journalist in the UK who tried VUA download. His conclusion - always, always go for a hard copy.

 

[stainlessliquid]

Whats with everyone freaking out like if they offered it available to download then they would ONLY offer it available to download screwing all the poor 56k users? Its an option for people who dont want to wait for slow shipping.

6gbs only takes a few hours on DSL and cable, which practically every person in the USA has. People download bigger games on Steam every day. Farmers and people who live in the woods can still have it mailed to them assuming they know what Snow Leopard is.

I would love the option of being able to download Leopard. Especially since they are charging 10 bucks for shipping a disc to people who recently bought a Mac. Why cant I just download it for free instead of paying 10 bucks and waiting a week for it to arrive?

I ordered Windows 7 specifically from microsoft.com because they let you download it instead of wait for shipment, its a huge convenience.

With Apple being so obsessed with digital distribution youd thing they would get it through their heads that they can also distribute their OS digitally.

Apple can't even keep mobile me running smooth, and when they released iphone os 3.0 their systems were impossible to get on. They simply don't yet have the infrastructure (maybe that's part of what their new data center is about) to deal with this, and, despite what people think, it's a small percentage of the population that prefers the "spend a few hours downloading, then burn a dvd" route.

Thats not a valid excuse. Valve rents temporary hosting for Steam downloads when they release a new game that is expected to have a huge amount of downloads, with a flick of the switch they can increase their bandwidth 10 fold. Apple can just as easily do the same. It costs thousands of dollars to rent that kind of bandwidth but its still a LOT cheaper than what it costs to print and manufacture things. Plus Apple knows all about high bandwidth, havent you heard of iTunes Store?

 

[cmaier]

Whats with everyone freaking out like if they offered it available to download then they would ONLY offer it available to download screwing all the poor 56k users.

6gbs only takes a few hours on DSL and cable, which practically every person in the USA has. People download bigger games on Steam every day. Farmers and people who live in the woods can still have it mailed to them assuming they know what Snow Leopard is.

I would love the option of being able to download Leopard. Especially since they are charging 10 bucks for shipping a disc to people who recently bought a Mac. Why cant I just download it for free instead of paying 10 bucks and waiting a week for it to arrive?

I ordered Windows 7 specifically from microsoft.com because they let you download it instead of wait for shipment, its a huge convenience.

With Apple being so obsessed with digital distribution youd thing they would get it through their heads that they can also distribute their OS digitally.


Thats not a valid excuse. Valve rents temporary hosting for Steam downloads when they release a new game that is expected to have a huge amount of downloads, with a flick of the switch they can increase their bandwidth 10 fold. Apple can just as easily do the same. It costs thousands of dollars to rent that kind of bandwidth but its still a LOT cheaper than what it costs to print and manufacture things. Plus Apple knows all about high bandwidth, havent you heard of iTunes Store?

You point out all the renting going on then suggest apple should allow you to download for free. Uh huh. And what's this "wait a week" nonsense. Preorder from amazon and you'll have it the day it's released.

 

[yg17]

Christ almighty, are all of you still stuck on dial up or something. I have a 10mbps internet connection (which, lets be honest here, isn't even THAT fast anymore) with no caps and can download 6 gigs in under 2 hours. Where's everyone getting figures like 2-3 days from?

If your connection is too slow or you don't have a DL burner, then buy it, but Apple should give those of us who have the capabilities to download it.

 

[stainlessliquid]

You point out all the renting going on then suggest apple should allow you to download for free. Uh huh. And what's this "wait a week" nonsense. Preorder from amazon and you'll have it the day it's released.

Did you read the last paragraph? Printing and manufacturing costs a lot more than it does to rent bandwidth. And thats not counting the hit they take from retail sales, which is considerable.

The download costs $29, the boxed version costs $29. Theyve already factored in the cost it takes to manufacture the discs and boxes when they priced it at $29. Apple makes MORE money per sale when people download it because bandwidth is cheaper than manufacturing.

 

[cmaier]

Did you read the last paragraph? Printing and manufacturing costs a lot more than it does to rent bandwidth. And thats not counting the hit they take from retail sales, which is considerable.

The download costs $29, the boxed version costs $29. Theyve already factored in the cost it takes to manufacture the discs and boxes when they priced it at $29. Apple makes MORE money per sale when people download it because bandwidth is cheaper than manufacturing.

If Apple would make more money that way, don't you think they'd do it?

 

[Daveoc64]

If Apple would make more money that way, don't you think they'd do it?

Apple would make more money sending it out in a plain brown envelope, but it's not good for marketing.

Apple clearly seems to like the boxed product in this regard, despite how much of a waste it really is.

 

[stainlessliquid]

Apple could do a lot of things that would make more money but they dont. It doesnt have anything to do with digital downloads being a good idea and a convenience to a lot of people. They will eventually offer their OS for download just like MS and Linux, its the way things are moving, companies love digital distribution because it makes their margins so much fatter.

 

[BaldiMac]

Apple would make more money sending it out in a plain brown envelope, but it's not good for marketing.

Apple clearly seems to like the boxed product in this regard, despite how much of a waste it really is.

Wait. Hold on. Are you saying that Apple actually considers things other than whether or not yg17 has a good enough connection to make this possible?!

Like marketing. Support costs. Re-downloading. Customer confusion. Possibility of corruption. Customer perception of downloads vs retail boxes.

 

[cmaier]

Apple could do a lot of things that would make more money but they dont. It doesnt have anything to do with digital downloads being a good idea and a convenience to a lot of people. They will eventually offer their OS for download just like MS and Linux, its the way things are moving, companies love digital distribution because it makes their margins so much fatter.

Yes. They will do it when there is enough bandwidth to make it worth their while, and when they can do it in a way that the vast majority of people who choose that method won't experience any substantial hiccups. They'll do it when they can do it right. Because earning $3 more per OS copy isn't worth it to them when they have to deal with all the pundits talking about all the glitches and all the people who weren't able to download, or who got corrupted or incomplete downloads, or all the people that didn't burn their dvds right and end up calling tech support, etc. Because they'd rather make money in the long run than make some short term gain at the expense of their reputation.

 

[Daveoc64]

Wait. Hold on. Are you saying that Apple actually considers things other than whether or not yg17 has a good enough connection to make this possible?!

Like marketing. Support costs. Re-downloading. Customer confusion. Possibility of corruption. Customer perception of downloads vs retail boxes.

Easy solution to all of those problems:

1) Continue to offer a boxed product available online and at retail.

2) Offer a simple installer (to run in Tiger or Leopard) that can either:

i) burn a disc quickly, easily and automatically
ii) copy the installer to the hard drive, run it automatically and then go from there

That installer would download an image of the OS (allowing for disconnection, slow download speeds etc.), check it to prevent corruption and then offer the above options for install.

From a marketing perspective, the opportunity to buy online need not be heavily promoted.

Some companies offering online downloads of software will send out a no-frills DVD (with basic packaging that's cheap) containing the software for backup purposes. That helps solve the need to re-download the software in the long term.

 

[BaldiMac]

Easy solution to all of those problems:

1) Continue to offer a boxed product available online and at retail.

2) Offer a simple installer (to run in Tiger or Leopard) that can either:

i) burn a disc quickly, easily and automatically
ii) copy the installer to the hard drive, run it automatically and then go from there

That installer would download an image of the OS, check it to prevent corruption and then offer the above options for install.

From a marketing perspective, the opportunity to buy online need not be heavily promoted.

That does not completely solve any of the problems that I listed.

 

[Daveoc64]

That solves none of the problems that I listed.

I believe it solves all of them.

 

[JFreak]

At this time, I would not want to download a 6GB image, so even if it was possible I would still want to buy the physical media. It is a whole lot easier and faster to pick it up on local store than wait for the DL to complete.

(EDIT: I only have a 12/2 ADSL line)