What do you think about Apple's $129 price tag?

MDLarson

MDLarson

Registered
I just read MacAddict's review of Panther. On the cover, they compliment OS 10.3 Panther by suggesting it could be an OS 11 (it is 10.3, right? - MacAddict had an OS X CD that says "Mac OS X Version 11" both on the cover and in the article)

But, all this praise for a new (great?) version of the operating system and yet they say (in the Bummer footnote):
"$129 is a lot to pay for a more-intuitive interface (although you do get a few other cool features). Which economy is Apple living in?
Click to expand...

I think it's obvious Apple likes the OS X name. If they name a new OS "OS 11", the X doesn't work anymore for marketing purposes – XI? Nah...

I know we aren't used to paying $129 per incremental upgrade, but Apple changed the game, and I don't think we're getting stung all that bad, especially compared to Windows prices.

So... whaddya think?
 
What do you mean "we aren't used to paying 129$ per incremental upgrade"? Apple just switched from doing one 0.1 and then one 0.5 increment to doing only 0.1 increments. Yes, OS 8-9 were cheaper, but that's quite a while ago now, isn't it?

Also: You don't get an upgrade-only CD if you buy it for 129$, you get a full license. There _is_ no upgrade (unless you buy 10.2 like 30 days before Panther is released, or a Mac with 10.2 in the same timeframe).

Look at it this way: It took from 1997 to 2000 to get from 8.0 to 10.0. It took 200 0 to 2003 to get from 10.0 to 10.3. So in 'old terms', we would - by now - be at Mac OS 12. And if it's only that number scheme that holds you back to shell out the 129$, then why not stay at 10.2 for a while. It's quite an okay operating system, too.
 
well it is 129$ every year for the OS. It is not THAT cheap but given that many people buy a new machine every two to three years with a new OS preinstalled and given that of course you dont HAVE TO HAVE it you can always wait till you feel like you need a new Mac or wait another year or so for 10.4.

There is a LOT of work put into Panther especially performance wise and there are some very neat things included. The could have waited another year and release it in a year from now it will be 10.3 with all the improvements of the 10.4 and sell it for 200$ or so. Personally I think that for what it offers it is a reasonable price to pay and I would rather pay a yearly "fee" in order to enjoy a timely improvement of my OS than wait 5 years to go from XP to Longhorn for example and just pay 200$. And if you think that in these 5 years many people have bought 2 machines they have paid at least 2 Windows licenses.

I would be happy to pay but for this year I get the GM through my ADC membership. (it is legal to keep that GM and not buy the boxed OS right??? first time I used ADC just cause I wanted the inside from Panther and going to buy a G5 on which I will have a discount so it was worth it)
 
$129 is cheap, compared to the cost of other operating systems. Linux is free, true, but definitely NOT for the home user.

Hell, even if OS X was the ONLY operating system out there, I don't think $129 is a lot to ask for. That's dirt cheap for what you get.

...and no, no one owes you any discounts on anything, even if you bought Jaguar 2 hours before Panther was released. That's the way life goes. Save some money and come back later -- it's not detrimental that you have Panther the day it comes out. So you'll be a little behind -- nothing wrong with that at all.
 
Originally posted by fryke
What do you mean "we aren't used to paying 129$ per incremental upgrade"? Apple just switched from doing one 0.1 and then one 0.5 increment to doing only 0.1 increments. Yes, OS 8-9 were cheaper, but that's quite a while ago now, isn't it?
Click to expand...
Yes, OS 8-9 was what I was referring to, sorry.

Anyway, I agree with everyone so far - I was just trying to understand why MacAddict would say this. I remember there was quite an uproar on this forum about the $129 price point for 10.1 and 10.2, that's all.
 
Fast User Switching and Expose are worth 129$ to me, so I get the other improvements for FREE - what a Deal!!!!!
 
Let's see, $199 for WinXP Home and $299 for Pro, at the full retail price. Then you have to activate it, and even once your past all that, it costs $100 to do a lot of stuff in your OS, since the Home version is rather crippled. I'd say you get a very good deal on Mac OS X upgrades.

Longhorn will probably be similar, if not more.
 
Right... 299 for XP that is worst than 10.2 :eek:

And XP is not good for an office to work... and it's not good for old computers where it sould work, but it gives so many big problems...

OS X is so nice and good... 10.3 is going to be so fast, cool, big and nice to use...
It is worthed to pay for it and "help" Apple to give us the best... even with 10.3.x updates... and more free software to add too!

Find another system with all you get inside with OS X, even 10.2 ...
 
Originally posted by ElDiabloConCaca
...and no, no one owes you any discounts on anything, even if you bought Jaguar 2 hours before Panther was released. That's the way life goes. Save some money and come back later -- it's not detrimental that you have Panther the day it comes out. So you'll be a little behind -- nothing wrong with that at all.
Click to expand...

Yes, if you buy Jaguar 2 hours before Panther is released, you can get the upgrade CD for 19$ or something. Just as when you buy it 30 days before the release. Same with a Mac that has a preinstalled Jaguar. That's what those coupons are for, you know.
 
Apple releases OS upgrades apx. every year for $129. Fine. MS releases OS upgrades every 2-5 years, for $149-299, that contain fewer improvements than any one of Apple's releases.

Who is giving you the better deal?
 
I've tested 10.3 a little bit and the things that I like are the new Finder (it's much more convenient now), Expose and User Switching (which does look ugly in the upper right). I'm also terribly upset that there aren't more appearance options like there were in OS 9. It was nice to have a more customizable experience than just blue and graphite. I'd like to see... mmmm, red scrollbars. :)

Of course I'll be buying it. :) But I'm going to be using my student discount for it at the Apple Store. So I'll get it at approximately half off. Good deal, really.
 
This was how much I've paid and when I paid:

  • Mac OS X Public Beta: Sept. 13, 2000 - $29.95
    Mac OS X 10.0: March 24, 2001 - $99.00
    Mac OS X 10.1: Sept. 29, 2001 -free
    Mac OS X 10.2: Aug. 23, 2002 -$129.00

Between when I paid for 10.0 and 10.2 there was 17 months. It has been 12 months since the last time I paid for an OS from Apple. If 10.3 comes out in Dec. 2003, it'll have been 16 months between releases that I paid for.

Lets look at the history of when we paid (assuming you bought on the release date) for operating systems from Apple:

  • Mac OS 7.6: Jan. 1997 -$99.00
    Mac OS 8.0: July 22, 1997 -$99.00
    Mac OS 8.1: Jan. 1998 -free
    Mac OS 8.5: Oct. 15, 1998 -$99.00
    Mac OS 8.6: May 5, 1999 -free
    Mac OS 9.0: Oct. 23, 1999 -$99.00
    Mac OS 9.1: Jan. 2001 -free

Lets look at the spacing between the paid releases:

  • 7.6 to 8.0: 6 months
    8.0 to 8.5: 15 months
    8.5 to 9.0: 12 months
    9.0 to 10.0: 17 months (not counting PB)
    10.0 to 10.2: 17 months

It looks like Apple is averaging about 13 and a half months between paid releases. I would guess that this would mean that 10.3 should be released in mid October.

Apple could start doing what Microsoft did with Windows NT. It went from NT 3.1 to NT 3.5 to NT 4.0 to 2000 Pro (aka NT 5.0) to XP (aka NT 5.1). Or they could do what Sun did with Solaris. That went from 2.3 to 2.4 to 2.5 to 2.6 to 7 (aka 2.7) to 8 (aka 2.8) to 9 (aka 2.9).

Basically, we aren't forking out much more than the cost of a pizza or two more now then we were with pre-X systems at about the same interval.

What's the problem with that?
 
The problem, as you put it, is that apparently many people feel betrayed when they hear Steve Jobs speaking about how great the Mac is (showing off a future build of Mac OS X) and then having to shell out another 129$ when the time for the OS arrives.

I guess (and that's only that, a guess) that with open source software and 'free' (read: illegal) music/movie downloads, people have just come to expect things are free. I suggest changing this expectation to them.

On the other hand: There was a time when Mac OS was still called 'System', and the thought of "buying a new System" was one of the strange thoughts a Macintosh user could have had. AFAIK System 7 was the first one that you could buy in packaged form.
 
$129 is no problem at all. Apple has a long tradition of quality hardware and software: but the software is what makes the hardware worthwhile. However, the software is about 10% of the price of the hardware, but is at least 50% of the Macintosh experience... So what are we complaining about? :D 13 months between releases and 130 dollars per release: do the math! 10 dollars a month for this beeee-autifulllll OooweSss! ... and that's practically like cutting-me-own-throat! ;) :)
 
The real problem is that all these OS upgrades should have different whole numbers. By now, we should be at Mac OS XII or Mac OS 12 )take your pick), expecting OS 13 (Panther). But Apple is keeping these upgrades in only .1 increment upgrades, making them seem like a lot less than what they are. When most software companies release a .1 upgrade, it is to fix bugs or change a few features, not release an entirely new and different version.

So deal with it, save up the money, and buy the upgrade. You're getting a lot better deal than the +.1 moniker implies.
 
well think about it like this windows 2000, NT 5.0 - 299

windows xp, NT 5.1 299

longhorn, NT 5.2 299

either way its nowhere near as expensive as what Microsoft is charging plus you don't have to hand over your soul at the till either
 
Originally posted by arden
By now, we should be at Mac OS XII or Mac OS 12 )take your pick), expecting OS 13 (Panther).
...
So deal with it, save up the money, and buy the upgrade. You're getting a lot better deal than the +.1 moniker implies.
Click to expand...
That's why I think it's a marketing thing. Apple = Mac OS X. Mac OS XI or XII looks dumb (but no dumber than Windows Me or XP :) )
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top