We have to pay for 10.1!!!
- Thread starter jdog
- Start date
Murderer909
Violent Member
yes, 10.1 will be over 100Mb. That may be the reason that apple won't make it a download on their server. It may just be too bandwidth consuming.
whitesaint
cocoa love
i just reviewed over the MacWorld Expo again and again, and Steve Jobs <b>didn't</b> say it would be available via software update. I'm sure it still will be though. If Apple did this they would be losing customers, because it seems that many many people are mad over whether they have to pay for the update or not.
Matrix Agent
Masochist Mascot
The reason that it was about 500 megs is because they are disk images, not patches. Anyway, as far as the dl or not to dl business goes, i think apple will put it on their servers, even if it does come out to be 100 megs. Everyone remember the 9.1 procedure?
If not, go here:
http://www.info.apple.com/support/macos9/9.1download.html
I believe that OS X 10.1 will provide the same 3 options that OS 9.1 provided:
1.Multiple part dl: they did it for the 70+ megs in 9.1, why can't they do it for 10.1?)
2. Complete download: this will be offered shortly after the release of 10.1, just like 9.1 did
3. CD order, this: just like in 9.1 will be somthing that you will and should have to pay for.
I just dont see where all of the speculation comes in, Apple has a set procedure for these types of releases. Why would they do anything else? This update will be like 9.1 in many ways. It is a feature upgrade. There was never any speculation about having to pay for 9.1, and it just wouldn't make sense to have people pay for 10.1 either.
Put yourself in apple's shoes: you're a hardware/software company that is facing off against a many large corporations, and you need to do more than just impress these corporations in order for them to support yourr platform. Right now, companies like adobe are rethinking if they want to continue developing for OS X, and you need to show them that OS X will be better than OS 9 could have ever been. So why, when you are trying to make users migrate to OS X would you put one more obstacle in their way? So you could slow down development even more? The quicker the transition to Puma is the quicker software corpartions can realize the strength of this new platform. Apple has nothing to gain from charging for this update except for a little bit of money, and they have plenty of that.
If not, go here:
http://www.info.apple.com/support/macos9/9.1download.html
I believe that OS X 10.1 will provide the same 3 options that OS 9.1 provided:
1.Multiple part dl: they did it for the 70+ megs in 9.1, why can't they do it for 10.1?)
2. Complete download: this will be offered shortly after the release of 10.1, just like 9.1 did
3. CD order, this: just like in 9.1 will be somthing that you will and should have to pay for.
I just dont see where all of the speculation comes in, Apple has a set procedure for these types of releases. Why would they do anything else? This update will be like 9.1 in many ways. It is a feature upgrade. There was never any speculation about having to pay for 9.1, and it just wouldn't make sense to have people pay for 10.1 either.
Put yourself in apple's shoes: you're a hardware/software company that is facing off against a many large corporations, and you need to do more than just impress these corporations in order for them to support yourr platform. Right now, companies like adobe are rethinking if they want to continue developing for OS X, and you need to show them that OS X will be better than OS 9 could have ever been. So why, when you are trying to make users migrate to OS X would you put one more obstacle in their way? So you could slow down development even more? The quicker the transition to Puma is the quicker software corpartions can realize the strength of this new platform. Apple has nothing to gain from charging for this update except for a little bit of money, and they have plenty of that.
Just a question. I've heard, from mac os rumors (not absolutely reliable, but still indicative of the truth) that OS X 10.1 would be shipped on at least 2, maybe up to 4 CDs. this makes some sense, since apple is planning to include iDVD with 10.1. plus 9.2 will probably be released with it, possibly accounting for another one. so the 20 bucks, if needed will buy you more than just 1 CD's worth of material. Just a note.
Only CD.
It will be 600MB.
From macintouch:
--Jim Heid, contributing editor for Macworld, sent a note in response to the issue of pricing for Apple's Mac OS X 10.1 upgrade:
"In a post-keynote phone interview, Phil Schiller told me that 10.1 will not be available as a download. I specifically asked him about the conflicting info -- Jobs saying it would be free but Apple's press release saying it would be $19 -- and his reply was that the update is free, but the $19 covers Apple's costs.
"His words: 'We literally upgraded every component of the Mac OS, and it is hundreds of megabytes and requires a CD for installation.' The same will apply to iDVD 2, he said."--
It will be 600MB.
From macintouch:
--Jim Heid, contributing editor for Macworld, sent a note in response to the issue of pricing for Apple's Mac OS X 10.1 upgrade:
"In a post-keynote phone interview, Phil Schiller told me that 10.1 will not be available as a download. I specifically asked him about the conflicting info -- Jobs saying it would be free but Apple's press release saying it would be $19 -- and his reply was that the update is free, but the $19 covers Apple's costs.
"His words: 'We literally upgraded every component of the Mac OS, and it is hundreds of megabytes and requires a CD for installation.' The same will apply to iDVD 2, he said."--
Matrix Agent
Masochist Mascot
Its too bad that apple screwed themselves on this one. If they hadn't taken DVD out of most of the line we could have had some nice DVD file discs, they could easily cover the amount of space contained in several CD's. I dont care whether this update is 10MB or 1GB, like one poster said before, thats what my cable modem is for. Apple must know that there are plenty of people out there with the capabilities to DL that much, for god sakes, they're hosting and downloading entire OSX discs off carracho....
It would give them a nice chance to show off OS X's server capabilities
It would give them a nice chance to show off OS X's server capabilities
I personally think that $20 is not too much to ask for this kind of upgrade.
1) If so much is different that it requires a CD boot
2) If as one poster mentioned the update is on 4 CD's
$20 is definitly justifiable. Don't forget, Apple is a business, not your buddy in Cupertino. I seem to recall Microsoft charging for the upgrade from Windows 95 to 98, why shoulden't Apple.
I paid for the PB, I paid for the full release, and I'll pay for the .1 update. This is still the best OS on any platform, and quite cheap for a full scale Unix OS.
1) If so much is different that it requires a CD boot
2) If as one poster mentioned the update is on 4 CD's
$20 is definitly justifiable. Don't forget, Apple is a business, not your buddy in Cupertino. I seem to recall Microsoft charging for the upgrade from Windows 95 to 98, why shoulden't Apple.
I paid for the PB, I paid for the full release, and I'll pay for the .1 update. This is still the best OS on any platform, and quite cheap for a full scale Unix OS.
I agree with you. I don't think the 20 bucks is all that unreasonable. Even if the d/l was available, I think I'd still spring for the cd(s) just to bypass all the intermediate updates if I ever have to do a re-install.
However, that said, I think I see where those not happy with the charge are coming from.
1) if SJ had not said it was a 'free update,' I don't think people would be as upset. I know, I know, he qualified the 'free' later, but he still said it. He should have been more honest and said exactly what it was and why.
2) If it is truly free and Apple is just charging the 20 clams to cover their costs, why shouldn't there be at least the option to d/l the update. I don't see it being a problem for those of us with fast connections. I could even burn my own cd(s) if I wanted. Again, I think a bit more honesty would lessen the resentment and anger felt by some.
3) Even using SJ's definition of 'free upgrade,' it's only free through the Up-to-Date program. I bought my (at the time) new 733 and OS X separately because I needed to upgrade and didn't want to wait until they came with X pre-installed. Do I now need to pay full price for v10.1? I'm guessing I won't but judging by Apple's seemingly schizophrenic state when it comes to customer service/relations, I wouldn't bet $20 on it...
However, that said, I think I see where those not happy with the charge are coming from.
1) if SJ had not said it was a 'free update,' I don't think people would be as upset. I know, I know, he qualified the 'free' later, but he still said it. He should have been more honest and said exactly what it was and why.
2) If it is truly free and Apple is just charging the 20 clams to cover their costs, why shouldn't there be at least the option to d/l the update. I don't see it being a problem for those of us with fast connections. I could even burn my own cd(s) if I wanted. Again, I think a bit more honesty would lessen the resentment and anger felt by some.
3) Even using SJ's definition of 'free upgrade,' it's only free through the Up-to-Date program. I bought my (at the time) new 733 and OS X separately because I needed to upgrade and didn't want to wait until they came with X pre-installed. Do I now need to pay full price for v10.1? I'm guessing I won't but judging by Apple's seemingly schizophrenic state when it comes to customer service/relations, I wouldn't bet $20 on it...
I think you misunderstand.
OSX 10.1 will be a free download update. The $20 for a cd is not for the software it is for the handling and shipping. Apple have always done it this way.
for example, OS9 was updated to 9.1 it was a quite a big download so users of dial up connections would probably need a CD update. Have you ever seen the 3 gray vouchers that came with your computer or the OSX package you may have purchased. These vouchers entitle you to a free update, however you do pay for the handling and shipping.
I live in the UK so it was £12 for a OS9.1 CD which IMHO was OK to pay. It would be nice if they would ship out the CD for free.
Other companies do similar things, Symantec for example charge less if you download software from their website, often £10 pounds less than if they have to send you a install CD.
OSX 10.1 will be a free download update. The $20 for a cd is not for the software it is for the handling and shipping. Apple have always done it this way.
for example, OS9 was updated to 9.1 it was a quite a big download so users of dial up connections would probably need a CD update. Have you ever seen the 3 gray vouchers that came with your computer or the OSX package you may have purchased. These vouchers entitle you to a free update, however you do pay for the handling and shipping.
I live in the UK so it was £12 for a OS9.1 CD which IMHO was OK to pay. It would be nice if they would ship out the CD for free.
Other companies do similar things, Symantec for example charge less if you download software from their website, often £10 pounds less than if they have to send you a install CD.
I think you misunderstand.
OSX 10.1 will be a free download update. The $20 for a cd is not for the software it is for the handling and shipping. Apple have always done it this way.
for example, OS9 was updated to 9.1 it was a quite a big download so users of dial up connections would probably need a CD update. Have you ever seen the 3 gray vouchers that came with your computer or the OSX package you may have purchased. These vouchers entitle you to a free update, however you do pay for the handling and shipping.
I live in the UK so it was £12 for a OS9.1 CD which IMHO was OK to pay. It would be nice if they would ship out the CD for free.
Other companies do similar things, Symantec for example charge less if you download software from their website, often £10 pounds less than if they have to send you a install CD.
OSX 10.1 will be a free download update. The $20 for a cd is not for the software it is for the handling and shipping. Apple have always done it this way.
for example, OS9 was updated to 9.1 it was a quite a big download so users of dial up connections would probably need a CD update. Have you ever seen the 3 gray vouchers that came with your computer or the OSX package you may have purchased. These vouchers entitle you to a free update, however you do pay for the handling and shipping.
I live in the UK so it was £12 for a OS9.1 CD which IMHO was OK to pay. It would be nice if they would ship out the CD for free.
Other companies do similar things, Symantec for example charge less if you download software from their website, often £10 pounds less than if they have to send you a install CD.
That's what I meant by, "...qualified his 'free' later..."
However, I think your assumption that there will be a d/l version, while it would be nice, goes against most comments made post-keynote by those in the know. I suppose you could read Mr. Schiller's comments any way you choose, but I choose to read "...will require a CD," and "...not be available as a download," to mean just that.
Big updates always come out on CD and Apple always charges some nominal fee for their 'costs' if you want the CD instead of the d/l. What they do not do is make statements saying it will 'require' a CD or that it will NOT be available as a download.
I sincerely hope he misstated the facts and that you are correct. But, like I said, I wouldn't bet that $20 on it.
However, I think your assumption that there will be a d/l version, while it would be nice, goes against most comments made post-keynote by those in the know. I suppose you could read Mr. Schiller's comments any way you choose, but I choose to read "...will require a CD," and "...not be available as a download," to mean just that.
Big updates always come out on CD and Apple always charges some nominal fee for their 'costs' if you want the CD instead of the d/l. What they do not do is make statements saying it will 'require' a CD or that it will NOT be available as a download.
I sincerely hope he misstated the facts and that you are correct. But, like I said, I wouldn't bet that $20 on it.
jove
Member
Hello,
Why do individuals demand, and feel entitled to, free stuff? As consumers we had every chance to investigate the short comings in the released PB2 10.0. 10.1 is at least $20 worth in increased functionality. Nobody was forced to buy the first version of X. In fact most publications recommended not to.
We could say Apple should have released the 10.1 functionaility in 10.0. They would have if they could have. In fact Steve expressed fustration not having it available at MW. If Apple waited untl Sept to release 10 for the first time imagine how upset the consumers would be then. The press would have had a field day!
Think of the 20 bucks as the fee to preview an incomplete product for the last several months and the initial cost as a payment in advanced for the complete product to be delivered in Sept
BTW 20 bucks covers the CD, packaging (design and production), shipping, server maintenance for the free download, and general related overhead. Add all that up and Apple is probably taking a hit at 20 dollars.
Why do individuals demand, and feel entitled to, free stuff? As consumers we had every chance to investigate the short comings in the released PB2 10.0. 10.1 is at least $20 worth in increased functionality. Nobody was forced to buy the first version of X. In fact most publications recommended not to.
We could say Apple should have released the 10.1 functionaility in 10.0. They would have if they could have. In fact Steve expressed fustration not having it available at MW. If Apple waited untl Sept to release 10 for the first time imagine how upset the consumers would be then. The press would have had a field day!
Think of the 20 bucks as the fee to preview an incomplete product for the last several months and the initial cost as a payment in advanced for the complete product to be delivered in Sept
BTW 20 bucks covers the CD, packaging (design and production), shipping, server maintenance for the free download, and general related overhead. Add all that up and Apple is probably taking a hit at 20 dollars.
I am well pissed off, I had to pay nearly IR£130 (Irish Pounds). That's about £99Stg (UK Pounds) and $150USD for my copy of OS X. This means OS X update CD would cost about IR£25 for me.... infact probably IR£30. I have no problem spending a whole weekend downloading 10.1, just as long as I can download it for free.
If I have to pay a single penny, I will buy a PeeCee insted of the iBook I was thinking of.
-James
If I have to pay a single penny, I will buy a PeeCee insted of the iBook I was thinking of.
-James
Jove, I would have no problem paying NOTHING for a programme in Public Beta 2 if it WAS IN FACT IN PUBLIC BETA TWO YOU DUMB BRAINLESS FUCK. OS X 10.0 was released as A FINAL version. If it was infact a public beta 2, it would have been called, Mac OS X; Public Beta 2. BUT IT WASN'T.
If I pay full price, IR£130 I expect at least core features, such as cd/dvd burning, playback. If not in the initial release, a free update would suffice. BUT, It is wrong to charge for these features, that should be at the core of any OS that was released for FULL Price.
-James
mr_mac_x
'No Avatar' avatar
Originally posted by jove
Think of the 20 bucks as the fee to preview an incomplete product for the last several months and the initial cost as a payment in advanced for the complete product to be delivered in Sept
That's a good point, jove. If you think of it as $20 for PB2, and $130 for the real final, it looks like a great deal. And jamesnp, go ahead and get your PC. XP will (probably) cost more than $200 anyway, and you'll have lost even more money! If you ask me, $130 + $200 is a lot more than $130 + $20, but whatever.