Jaguar vs. .mac
- Thread starter xaqintosh
- Start date
ElDiabloConCaca
U.S.D.A. Prime
How are Apple's software prices NOT acceptable to many people? I don't know of any other mainstream desktop OS solution that costs less than Jaguar, besides Linux, which really isn't mainstream and really can't be considered a desktop OS solution yet.
A little over $100 seems cheap, cheap, cheap -- even to someone with no money -- compared with the other offerings out there. I just don't understand -- I think people were shocked that they had to pay ANYTHING for Jaguar, and directed their shock directly at Apple, when they should have been directing at themselves for assuming they'd get something for nothing.
ksv
web developer
For the last time;
Do you really think e.g. a school that has just bought Macs for every classroom, and barely can afford pencils and draft books for their pupils, would pay $69 for every single computer, for a system update? Eh, no!?
That's why we have 133 MHz pentiums running Windows 95 at school.
ElDiabloConCaca
U.S.D.A. Prime
First of all, a school that can afford a classroom full of Macs can definitely afford a box of pencils. No two ways around it. And if that school chose computers over pencils, then I'd be inclined to say that school needs some serious review of their administration. Computers are useful, but it's the children's brains that do the work -- not the computers. I grew up without computers in my schools and I turned out just fine, and pretty damn computer-savvy at the same time. And we always had a pencil to write with.
Second of all, $69 per machine for a system update (and oh, WHAT AN UPDATE!) is pretty damn affordable compared to upgrading a Windows machine -- and, we all know damn well that Apple will help out the educational sector in order to regain some market share there... they did it in Maine (is that correct?) or WHEREVER they did it -- for much cheaper than the educational prices... remember the plan to put an iBook in the hands of every 6th-8th grader? They didn't get the prices as listed on the educational Apple store page -- they got them for MUCH less. And I'm sure Apple would do the same for a school full of Macs that wanted to get Jaguar on all their machines.
And I hope to high heaven that if you're still running Pentium 133s that you've got a well-stocked supply closet full of pencils and draft books. Otherwise I'd be tempted to say you're living in a 3rd-world country -- I don't know of a single school in America that can't afford pencils and draft books. You're making this situation out to be worse than it actually is. Plus, what's the harm of running OS X 10.1.5 for a year or so until the school's funds catch up? Hell, that's what most schools do now! My university is still on Windows 2000 Pro -- not XP Pro -- probably because of the cost prohibitive upgrade path -- but we encounter no problems doing the things that people do with XP Pro every day.
Just because OS 10.2 is out (well, as of Aug. 24th) doesn't mean that people will be forced to upgrade. Apple's not holding a gun to your head chanting, "Upgrade or else." Look at Microsoft -- they're SERIOUSLY considering FORCING people to upgrade their software when new software is released! That means if you're running Windows 2000, and Microsoft releases Windows 2001 or whatever, you'll be forced to pay whether you want or not, because if you don't, Microsoft will disable your previous software. Now THAT'S what we should be bitching about -- not a room full of perfectly good Macs that could either be upgraded or not.
Second of all, $69 per machine for a system update (and oh, WHAT AN UPDATE!) is pretty damn affordable compared to upgrading a Windows machine -- and, we all know damn well that Apple will help out the educational sector in order to regain some market share there... they did it in Maine (is that correct?) or WHEREVER they did it -- for much cheaper than the educational prices... remember the plan to put an iBook in the hands of every 6th-8th grader? They didn't get the prices as listed on the educational Apple store page -- they got them for MUCH less. And I'm sure Apple would do the same for a school full of Macs that wanted to get Jaguar on all their machines.
And I hope to high heaven that if you're still running Pentium 133s that you've got a well-stocked supply closet full of pencils and draft books. Otherwise I'd be tempted to say you're living in a 3rd-world country -- I don't know of a single school in America that can't afford pencils and draft books. You're making this situation out to be worse than it actually is. Plus, what's the harm of running OS X 10.1.5 for a year or so until the school's funds catch up? Hell, that's what most schools do now! My university is still on Windows 2000 Pro -- not XP Pro -- probably because of the cost prohibitive upgrade path -- but we encounter no problems doing the things that people do with XP Pro every day.
Just because OS 10.2 is out (well, as of Aug. 24th) doesn't mean that people will be forced to upgrade. Apple's not holding a gun to your head chanting, "Upgrade or else." Look at Microsoft -- they're SERIOUSLY considering FORCING people to upgrade their software when new software is released! That means if you're running Windows 2000, and Microsoft releases Windows 2001 or whatever, you'll be forced to pay whether you want or not, because if you don't, Microsoft will disable your previous software. Now THAT'S what we should be bitching about -- not a room full of perfectly good Macs that could either be upgraded or not.
ksv
web developer
To say it in an other way, why charge for updates at all? What's the point? Microsoft has to because Windows is their primary income source.
I'd gladly pay some more for new Macs if it included free software updates for e.g. a year or two. That would keep all Macs up-to-date, and both sides would be happy.
Tell me, how many 70 years old grandmas are going to pay for the 10.2 update? Or former PC users who just bought a brand new Mac?
I know a lot of both Mac and PC users, and I can tell you that the only ones of them who pays for software updates are the pro-users.
Over to an other topic; no, on my school we are only given one pencil and a rubber every year. The ventilation system doesn't work, so we have to have the windows constantly open. That results in a classroom being 17°C in winter and 33°C in summer (yes, I've brought a thermometer several times and measured). Bugs and insects crawl out of the drainpipes in the shower in the wardrobe. And this is Norway, listed by the UN as the best country to live in ( )
I'd gladly pay some more for new Macs if it included free software updates for e.g. a year or two. That would keep all Macs up-to-date, and both sides would be happy.
Tell me, how many 70 years old grandmas are going to pay for the 10.2 update? Or former PC users who just bought a brand new Mac?
I know a lot of both Mac and PC users, and I can tell you that the only ones of them who pays for software updates are the pro-users.
Over to an other topic; no, on my school we are only given one pencil and a rubber every year. The ventilation system doesn't work, so we have to have the windows constantly open. That results in a classroom being 17°C in winter and 33°C in summer (yes, I've brought a thermometer several times and measured). Bugs and insects crawl out of the drainpipes in the shower in the wardrobe. And this is Norway, listed by the UN as the best country to live in (
)
dsibilly
Registered
OK, how about this situation: I've had a copy of 10.0 since release ($129), but until recently didn't even have a Mac to put it on. In order to use any of the productive software (Photoshop, Office, etc) I had to run out and buy 10.1 less than a month ago ($129)... now Apple wants another $129 for 10.2.
That's (129.00)x3 = $387.00
Pretty close to $400 for my liking for an OS that STILL isn't finished. It's great, but why am I paying hundreds of dollars for what's still a late-beta OS? It wasn't finished with 10.0, 10.1 made it at least useable, and 10.2 is doing nothing but adding features that should have been there from the get-go. I understand that Apple needs to make money, but with so small a market share, they need to make friends too...
Okay, what OS is a finished product nowadays, anyway?! Windows XP? Yeah, sure. SP 1 will be out soon. Plus they'll charge for the Plus! package (which adds stuff that should be _inside_ the package).
Mac OS 9? Yes, that's true. It's a finished product. It's also a bit out of date, technically, and of course not a current product. Maybe the old days _were_ better? Nope. I like Mac OS X.
And I also consider it a finished product.
If you bought Mac OS X 10.0 without having a computer to run it on, you're erhm, either quite dumb or a big fan of Apple and bought it to support them. But then you won't argue the price for Jag is too high, right?
However you turn it: You have paid 258$ for Mac OS X so far (that includes Jaguar) - or you didn't make use of Apple's free offers. And that's either since March 24, 2001 or even September 2000 (Public Beta).
Mac OS 9? Yes, that's true. It's a finished product. It's also a bit out of date, technically, and of course not a current product. Maybe the old days _were_ better? Nope. I like Mac OS X.
And I also consider it a finished product.
If you bought Mac OS X 10.0 without having a computer to run it on, you're erhm, either quite dumb or a big fan of Apple and bought it to support them. But then you won't argue the price for Jag is too high, right?
However you turn it: You have paid 258$ for Mac OS X so far (that includes Jaguar) - or you didn't make use of Apple's free offers. And that's either since March 24, 2001 or even September 2000 (Public Beta).
90X Double Side
Registered
You bought 10.0 when you didn't have a computer, then you bought 10.1 retail, even though it was a free upgrade to Mac OS X users, and even though Apple had announced months ago that Jaguar would be released this summer? I don't think you can blame Apple for that. Also, 10.0 was availible many places for $119 or $109 (or with free RAM, etc.), so the most a thrifty shopper could have payed for Mac OS X is
10.0: $119
10.1: $0
10.2: $79
Total: $198
And if you tried to give Apple every penny you could by paying MSRP for everything and ordering the mail-order 10.1 with the new devtools CD (which you can pick up for free now, btw), you would still pay only
10.0: $129
10.1: $19
10.2: $129
Total: $277, over 18 months.
Now, $198 is not out of line with the $80-100 Mac users have traditionally payed per year for OS updates, and people have payed for updates much less significant than 10.2, like 7.5, 8.5, and 9.0, without complaining. If you didn't do any shopping around on any of the updates, it's a little more than the norm, but we've gotten quite a lot more innovaton than we usually do. Did buying 8.0, 8.5, and 9.0 give you as many new features as buying 10.0, 10.1, and 10.2? It certainly didn't for me.
dtmdoc
UC Gundam Freak
im relatively new to macs (not including my foray into apple back
in the days of the IIc etc). I bought my first mac
in dec with 10.1.1 or 10.1.2. also im eligble to get jaguar
at 20 bucks cuz i just got my iBook one week ago. So I'm not
too upset with the price per se, but I can understand
why many would be. Also, I dont know why Apple
had to emulate M$ in regards to .Net vs .Mac.
At the least, email with a small storage space should still be
free.
Just my $.02
in the days of the IIc etc). I bought my first mac
in dec with 10.1.1 or 10.1.2. also im eligble to get jaguar
at 20 bucks cuz i just got my iBook one week ago. So I'm not
too upset with the price per se, but I can understand
why many would be. Also, I dont know why Apple
had to emulate M$ in regards to .Net vs .Mac.
At the least, email with a small storage space should still be
free.
Just my $.02
caramelApple
The Mac Geekette!
1.) Youre lucky because you bought an iBook
2.) youre lucky because you get Jaguar at $20!
ahhhh... i envy you... thats my dream... to get an iBook with Jaguar running on it... ahh....
but im only 14... so what hopes do i have in raisisng enough money...
The Mac Geekette
2.) youre lucky because you get Jaguar at $20!
ahhhh... i envy you... thats my dream... to get an iBook with Jaguar running on it... ahh....
but im only 14... so what hopes do i have in raisisng enough money...
The Mac Geekette
1. dtmdoc - I think the iBook is an excellent value. The TiBook is cool, but pushing the limits of dollar value.
2. You all suck. This thread has been people ripping on each other instead of listening. Each and every person who posted to this thread sucks.
3. Generalizations are always wrong.
4. A note to those who don't know me, 2 is overstated, 3 says so, and 3 is self effacing / self contradicting. It's a joke, laugh.
5. We have 6 Herve's. And counting I assume.
6. I think .mac is overpriced at stated pricing, but reasonable at $50 / year for how much most people will use it. It's just that MANY people only used / will use the e-mail. and $9 per month for an e-mail address is more than AOL charges for 7 of them, and AOL'll give you free dial up for 3 hours / month with that.
6.2 Virus protection as a feature? I don't use it now. How is this a feature? I have only had one virus on my computer, it was a Word Macro virus in help documentation that I never read ... and I don't use Word. Anyway, I think that one year subscriptions could be given away with purchases like OSes and machines, and I haven't seen this. I'd gladly pay $100/year to get major OS upgrades for free upon release.
7. I can pay for 10.2 - but I don't understand why Apple is trying to fragment their user base. The stats I saw were like 10% using X and 90% using 9. Why break up the user base into 9, 10, and 10.2 when the money made from current 10 users is tiny compared to 9 users and new users. That's what tweaks my noggin.
8. I feel like I'm gonna butt heads with El Diablo again. I know a lot of people who are dropping their mac.com accounts because the package doesn't fit them. I think Apple could make similar money and offer similar services, but continue to offer $15/year or free e-mail only 5M accounts. 10.2 is supposed to add features, not kill old ones. The OS and its services was not intended or marketed as subscription based.
9. .mac is probably the most awful name to give this service. I think it was meant as a playful jab at microsoft, and instead it has come off as emulation. Why this is so could be an interesting discussion, but probably not one that will happen here.
10. I write too much when I'm angered.
2. You all suck. This thread has been people ripping on each other instead of listening. Each and every person who posted to this thread sucks.
3. Generalizations are always wrong.
4. A note to those who don't know me, 2 is overstated, 3 says so, and 3 is self effacing / self contradicting. It's a joke, laugh.
5. We have 6 Herve's. And counting I assume.
6. I think .mac is overpriced at stated pricing, but reasonable at $50 / year for how much most people will use it. It's just that MANY people only used / will use the e-mail. and $9 per month for an e-mail address is more than AOL charges for 7 of them, and AOL'll give you free dial up for 3 hours / month with that.
6.2 Virus protection as a feature? I don't use it now. How is this a feature? I have only had one virus on my computer, it was a Word Macro virus in help documentation that I never read ... and I don't use Word. Anyway, I think that one year subscriptions could be given away with purchases like OSes and machines, and I haven't seen this. I'd gladly pay $100/year to get major OS upgrades for free upon release.
7. I can pay for 10.2 - but I don't understand why Apple is trying to fragment their user base. The stats I saw were like 10% using X and 90% using 9. Why break up the user base into 9, 10, and 10.2 when the money made from current 10 users is tiny compared to 9 users and new users. That's what tweaks my noggin.
8. I feel like I'm gonna butt heads with El Diablo again. I know a lot of people who are dropping their mac.com accounts because the package doesn't fit them. I think Apple could make similar money and offer similar services, but continue to offer $15/year or free e-mail only 5M accounts. 10.2 is supposed to add features, not kill old ones. The OS and its services was not intended or marketed as subscription based.
9. .mac is probably the most awful name to give this service. I think it was meant as a playful jab at microsoft, and instead it has come off as emulation. Why this is so could be an interesting discussion, but probably not one that will happen here.
10. I write too much when I'm angered.
ElDiabloConCaca
U.S.D.A. Prime
Don't worry, I butt heads with EVERYONE here... didn't they tell you? It's in the licensing agreement -- I've been sent back through time to disagree with everyone on most points made. Sorry, it's my job...
Anyways -- I'm finally coming around and seeing what people have been so upset about. I don't want to pay for .mac. And that's a silly name. "iTools" would be MUCH more appropriate NOW, seeing how Apple finally implemented some TOOLS this time around! I do think that $99 is steep now for what you get. $50 is a great discount off of $99, but is still too steep for what you get.
I will shell out the $50 for now. I don't want to lose my .mac stuff. I don't like the feeling of being forced into paying, but hey, I can't complain -- beggars can't be choosers. I like the feeling of using the integrated tools and what-not. I just like the whole premise around .mac, and how it's gonna run circles around MS's .NET thingy.
I'm not backing down off my stance that $129 is just fine for 10.2. And the user base won't be fragmented more -- it'll still be OS 9 vs. OS X. There won't be any 10.1 vs. 10.2. Maybe some compatibility issues, but it's all OS X. Do you consider OS 9 users to be fragmented just because some are using 9.1 and others 9.2.2?