Will it cost anything for Tiger users to upgrade to Leopard?

[clevin]

I'm not even sure how to respond to these two, very well numbered "points." I think I'm just going to stop now. Clearly this person is trying to reveal how great Windows is to Mac users, which is never going to happen.

EDIT: 1. Are you saying your using Firefox solely for the sake of it being a third party app, rather than for any actual reason?
2. Windows is dominant... I wouldn't call it "popular."

I was saying firefox provides an open platform, and you can get 3rd party extension on it to meet each user's different requirements. Just like windows embrace more 3rd party software developers.

I wasn't trying to say how great windows is, since I switched to linux then OSX with no regrets, I was simply saying windows has it positive side, and Vista did provide huge security improvement and other core/end user/developer improvements.

 

[dpaanlka]

i bet there are more ford driver in the US than, say, ferrari

A more practical comparison, like Ford vs. BMW, would be more appropriate I think. Plenty of people don't drive Ferraris because there is no justification for the price tag (many cars are faster than Ferraris and cost less than a tenth as much - and speed is the only thing Ferrari has). For what a Ferrari offers, it should cost as much as, say, a high end BMW... not three times as much.

 

[bearbo]

I was saying firefox provides an open platform, and you can get 3rd party extension on it to meet each user's different requirements. Just like windows embrace more 3rd party software developers.

unless you can somehow prove OS X discourage 3rd party developer, that argument is invalid in this thread.

I wasn't trying to say how great windows is

you certainly sounded like you were, which i dont 100% disagree, windows has its positive sides.

...Vista did provide huge security improvement and other core/end user/developer improvements.

i agree with you on this... but this is on relative terms, and relative to what Windows offered before... however, OS X has always had these...

which goes back to the topic of this thread, it is justifable for leopard release to not be free.

 

[clevin]

hmm... that somehow address the diff between OS X and Windows?

right, more popular, more people use, that's a fact, i'm not gonna argue with you... but you should also know, general public is always ignorant... which means popular things aren't always the best

i bet there are more ford driver in the US than, say, ferrari

well, u made a good point, I agree popular product can be crappy. Like 04' election, I can say for sure, OSX is safer (at least for now), OSX is prettier, OSX is more stable. although I do think windows are popular for a good reason other than "ignorant user"

 

[dpaanlka]

well, u made a good point, I agree popular product can be crappy. Like 04' election, I can say for sure, OSX is safer (at least for now), OSX is prettier, OSX is more stable. although I do think windows are popular for a good reason other than "ignorant user"

The United States Presidential election is not a product. Also, the percentage of those who voted for Bush was very close (1% - 5%) to those who voted for Kerry. This is not similar at all to the difference between Mac users to PC users, which is hugely disproportionate.

Also, because of this, it is best not to instill your political ideas anywhere on these forums other than the political area.

 

[bearbo]

well, u made a good point, I agree popular product can be crappy. Like 04' election, I can say for sure, OSX is safer (at least for now), OSX is prettier, OSX is more stable. although I do think windows are popular for a good reason other than "ignorant user"

it's popular, or as dpaanlka corrected me, dominant, because it was not hardware dependent when computer popularized, and now altho OS X is arguably better in lots of aspects, big organization, and not as demanding users don't want to bother to switch... because "switching" takes energy, money, and time.

 

[clevin]

unless you can somehow prove OS X discourage 3rd party developer, that argument is invalid in this thread.
you certainly sounded like you were, which i dont 100% disagree, windows has its positive sides.
i agree with you on this... but this is on relative terms, and relative to what Windows offered before... however, OS X has always had these...
which goes back to the topic of this thread, it is justifable for leopard release to not be free.

Im just saying the facts is M$ windows has more 3rd party developers, whatever the reasons are (popularity i guess), M$ don't need to focus on small piece program. when new windows out, users always ask "what architecture improvements are there", rather than "what small new features are there".

Just like if I say "firefox is more secure", i dont care what the reasons are, it might not because firefox is better in core, but due to the fact that its not the majority in market.

and yes, OSX's "better stuff" are already there!, and whatelse deserve another $130? thats my point!
also, i never say they should give it out for free, i was saying <$60 is a good price

 

[bearbo]

Im just saying the facts is M$ windows has more 3rd party developers, whatever the reasons are (popularity i guess), M$ don't need to focus on small piece program. when new windows out, users always ask "what architecture improvements are there", rather than "what small new features are there".

Just like if I say "firefox is more secure", i dont care what the reasons are, it might not because firefox is better in core, but due to the fact that its not the majority in market.

and yes, OSX's "better stuff" are already there!, and whatelse deserve another $130? thats my point!
also, i never say they should give it out for free, i was saying <$60 is a good price

uh huh...
i have not known a single average joe user ask "what architecture improvements are there" maybe you have i don't know

firefox is more secure not because itos not the majority in market... firefox is more secure than Internet Explorer because it has a more strict policy in block out unwatned connections... altho it's not perfect, is certainly better written program.

sure to PC users, the features OS X offers in each new release might not seem obvious... but that's because OS X has too many great features that Windows dont... just like to a Ford driver, the difference between BMW and Ferrari might not justify the cost difference, but it might do for BMW drivers

 

[displaced]

Anyway, I would like to hear why you think each 10.x is so different? more small programs? or structural change? if M$ sold their system like these 10.x increments price, at these 10.x's releasing pace, trust me, PC user will sue M$ to supreme court, LOL

Massive structural changes that have allowed better applications to be produced.

Enhancing the underpinnings of the operating system may not immediately bring any 'wow' factor. However, these additions, fixes, simplifications and reorganisations allow developers to create better applications in a quicker amount of time.

Tiger was *massive* for developers. CoreData, CoreVideo cocoa bindings, embedded SQLite, better integration of Cocoa, Carbon and Java. A quick glance through MacUpdate's listings reveals how these technologies have led to some great applications.

I've used OS X continuously -- every 0.0.1 and 0.1 update since 10.0.3. If you'd done the same, you wouldn't have any qualms about the worth of these updates.

Also, you've got to bear something very important in mind: OS X in its present incarnation is very young. Take a look at some screenshots of the first public beta (only 6 and a bit years ago) and compare them to what we have today. It's astonishing. Compare XP Service Pack 2 (MS's current desktop OS) to what was around back when OS X was in beta - Windows 2000. There's really not a lot that XP offers that wasn't possible in Win2K. As a Windows developer, there's very very few instances where XP offers features that I can't use in 2K*. Where's the innovation? Where's the value of XP if I can code Win2K to the same standard?

[edit: oops, yes.. I just remembered *one* thing XP gave me that 2K didn't... a few extra classes in the WMI interface. Whoop-de-do. The workaround to operate on 2K was just to tweak the registry directly. Not exactly a brave new world of features...]

The fact that Apple's not neglecting the guts of the OS is heartwarming. Too many developers view platforms as 'good enough'. It's important that Apple keep improving the core of the OS so that developers can produce better software.

On a final note, I can't wait to see what user interface designers come up with once they get their hands on CoreAnimation -- something which itself wouldn't have arrived if not for the work done in past years on Quartz, Quartz Extreme, and the Quartz Compositor.

 

[dpaanlka]

Im just saying the facts is M$ windows has more 3rd party developers, whatever the reasons are (popularity i guess), M$ don't need to focus on small piece program

I fail to see how Windows lack of features makes Windows a better OS. What in gods name are you talking about? How is that a good thing??? Third party developers making add-ons to Windows is not a reason for Microsoft to be lazy. It is the result. "Windows might not have any features, but third party developers are there to make up for it!" Why are you making lame excuses like this? What does this have to do with Windows being a good OS?

Just like if I say "firefox is more secure", i dont care what the reasons are, it might not because firefox is better in core, but due to the fact that its not the majority in market.

That sort of reasoning has been roundly discredited time and time again. And Firefox has an enormous market share, btw. Much higher than the Mac market share.

and yes, OSX's "better stuff" are already there!, and whatelse deserve another $130? thats my point!
also, i never say they should give it out for free, i was saying <$60 is a good price

Because more better stuff is coming!

 

[clevin]

uh huh...
i have not known a single average joe user ask "what architecture improvements are there" maybe you have i don't know

firefox is more secure not because itos not the majority in market... firefox is more secure than Internet Explorer because it has a more strict policy in block out unwatned connections... altho it's not perfect, is certainly better written program.

oh, i forget I was not "average windows user", lol which is true, i guess I and my friends are more picky than average windows users.

about firefox stuff, i won't discuss more, Im a mod of a local firefox forum, so just let you know I m no "IEfanboy" whatsoever, I enjoy the fact its more secure now, but I can't predict future, and the extension installation system is not making me feel good enough to say "its definitely safer".

 

[dpaanlka]

oh, i forget I was not "average windows user"

I disagree. You seem to be pretty average to me (making excuses to justify Windows' lameness, using Games to somehow prove Windows is better, etc...)

 

[clevin]

I fail to see how Windows lack of features makes Windows a better OS. What in gods name are you talking about? How is that a good thing??? Third party developers making add-ons to Windows is not a reason for Microsoft to be lazy. It is the result. "Windows might not have any features, but third party developers make them instead!" Why are you making lame excuses like this? What does this have to do with Windows being a good OS?

That sort of reasoning has been roundly discredited time and time again. And Firefox has an enormous market share, btw. Much higher than the Mac market share.

Because more better stuff is coming!

I feel difficult to convince you that windows is a quite different idea than OSX. and I can see you kept your focus on "features", maybe displaced's post is more interesting.
I really think your question is because you have very little experience about windows, and maybe its hard for you to imagine how it works.

 

[bearbo]

oh, i forget I was not "average windows user", lol which is true, i guess I and my friends are more picky than average windows users.

about firefox stuff, i won't discuss more, Im a mod of a local firefox forum, so just let you know I m no "IEfanboy" whatsoever, I enjoy the fact its more secure now, but I can't predict future, and the extension installation system is not making me feel good enough to say "its definitely safer".

you still, after how many have i asked, have not told me what is your profession.

just because you are a mod of a local firefox forum, doesnt mean jack.

i have not said you are a IEfanboy, i have not even implied it.

you are probably in your teens, or at the most 20s, from the way you sound when you say "I and my friends"... people in your age tend to think you are more than average PC users, and that's probably to a large extend true... but what architectural improvement in windows would you say benefit you directly, let along understanding it?

again i'm asking, what scientist are you?

 

[clevin]

I disagree. You seem to be pretty average to me (making excuses to justify Windows' lameness, using Games to somehow prove Windows is better, etc...)

well. again, thanks for your comments

 

[bearbo]

I feel difficult to convince you that windows is a quite different idea than OSX. and I can see you kept your focus on "features", maybe displaced's post is more interesting.
I really think your question is because you have very little experience about windows, and maybe its hard for you to imagine how it works.

i disagree.

i believe the reason we did not just sit on the so called architectural improvement is because we are trying to convince you that on top of the architectural that OS X release offers, which vista might offers too, there are more very useful features... which vista does not offer.

just like i did not tell you we can connect internet in OS X, because that's a given. architectural improvements are given too

 

[clevin]

you are probably in your teens, or at the most 20s, from the way you sound when you say "I and my friends"... people in your age tend to think you are more than average PC users, and that's probably to a large extend true... but what architectural improvement in windows would you say benefit you directly, let along understanding it?

again i'm asking, what scientist are you?

i avoided the question is because I don't feel like answering it. Clear?
Im glad you think im in my teens, which im not, sorry, i don't think its necessary to talk about that.
about your last question. I can not tell for all users, but to my experience, windows 98 introduced fat32 system, activex, windows 2000 introduced NTFS system, windows xp, unfortunately really was not a big improvement from 2000, vista, I don't know yet.

 

[clevin]

i disagree.

i believe the reason we did not just sit on the so called architectural improvement is because we are trying to convince you that on top of the architectural that OS X release offers, which vista might offers too, there are more very useful features... which vista does not offer.

just like i did not tell you we can connect internet in OS X, because that's a given. architectural improvements are given too

its a fair point, although I don't think those features deserve $129, but at least I understand your point.

 

[yellow]

Despite appearances, Tiger was more than Spotlight and Automator.
Panther was more than Exposé and whatever.
Jaguar was more than actually being a decent release as opposed to 10.1 (which was a POS).
Those are just the highly publicized "improvements" for the masses that don't know any better.
Would Joe Averageuser CARE if Apple said, "Panther, now with an Active Directory Plug-in!"?
No. So that isn't publicized.
But there's a lot there in each successive release of OS X. More than Bells & Whistles.

windows 2000 introduced NTFS system

NTFS was introduced with Windows NT (4).

 

[bearbo]

its a fair point, although I don't think those features deserve $129, but at least I understand your point.

if you can see that... which offers, say features AND arcitectural improvement... for 130, how do you justify vista, which only offers the latter?

 

[clevin]

Despite appearances, Tiger was more than Spotlight and Automator.
Panther was more than Exposé and whatever.
Those are just the highly publicized "improvements" for the masses that don't know any better.
Would Joe Averageuser CARE if Apple said, "Panther, now with an Active Directory Plug-in!". No. So that isn't publicized. But there's a lot there in each successive release of OS X. More than Bells & Whistles.

hehe, interesting point. and I agree, i just wonder how dramatic are these "under the hood stuff". since I think apple's developers are doing thing at approximately same efficiency as M$ developers.

another interesting point is, sounds like you are saying majority OSX users care more about bells &whistles. lol

 

[clevin]

if you can see that... which offers, say features AND arcitectural improvement... for 130, how do you justify vista, which only offers the latter?

yes, its about how dramatic the improvements are, you can't say "he has an apple, she has an orange and an apple, so she eats more", what if "his apple is 3 times bigger than her apple and orange"?

 

[bearbo]

hehe, interesting point. and I agree, i just wonder how dramatic are these "under the hood stuff". since I think apple's developers are doing thing at approximately same efficiency as M$ developers.

another interesting point is, sounds like you are saying majority OSX users care more about bells &whistles. lol

i believe he's saying majority of Joe Averageuser cares about bells and whistles

why, may i ask, would you spell MS as M$, it's quite bothersome

 

[dpaanlka]

I feel difficult to convince you that windows is a quite different idea than OSX.

Well, lets see. They're both operating systems.

and I can see you kept your focus on "features", maybe displaced's post is more interesting.

You're insisting that Windows is good because it has no features. That is such nonsense.

I really think your question is because you have very little experience about windows, and maybe its hard for you to imagine how it works.

No, that's definitely not the reason.

Im glad you think im in my teens, which im not, sorry, i don't think its necessary to talk about that.

Especially since you pointed to Games as being a "feature" of Windows.

 

[bearbo]

yes, its about how dramatic the improvements are, you can't say "he has an apple, she has an orange and an apple, so she eats more", what if "his apple is 3 times bigger than her apple and orange"?

prove to me how vista hs "more dramatic" improvements... by tell me, as in in your own writing, not just link to this and that (altho links would be nice too)