Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

ryju · Mar 11, 2004, 08:50 AM

Originally posted by mikerally:

How about you save your money and upgrade your Mac OS when it's particulary necessary or relevant for you?

My thoughts exactly.

MindFad · Apr 13, 2004, 05:07 PM

I don't know what thread to pick, so I went with this one. It would be cool if you could collapse windows into titlebars as you can in Stickies.app. Try it out. If you could have the option to do that system wide instead of collapsing to the dock, that would be cool. Without the use of third-party apps, I mean. And let us choose our colors for Aqua! Graphite, Aqua ... "Other..." would be a nice touch.

(And make scrolling performance faster, *cough*.)

And is Apple supposed to be demoing 10.4 at this year's WWDC, or no?

Jasoco · Apr 13, 2004, 07:19 PM

It's called WindowShades, and it was removed in OS X. Look at www.Unsanity.com for a replacement.

PookJP · Apr 13, 2004, 07:39 PM

Originally posted by Graymalkin:
At $129 a new version of MacOS costs you 35� a day. If you buy two Frappucinos a week you are spending $411 a year at the very least. Cut out one of those Frappucinos a week and you'll have enough for not only OSX 10.4 but enough for iLife '05 and a pair of low cost shareware applications. If you decided Panther wasn't worthy of your $129 and skip directly from Jaguar to 10.4 it will only cost you 17� a day.

The other day I was drinking my OS X and, man alive, did it quench my thirst while waking me up. Amazingly, just a few months ago, I was marooned on a desert island and, thank god, a crate of OS X washed up on shore. I had been dying of thirst for three days straight, and bless Steve's heart, I drank OS X until I was rescued. Best of all, whenever I'm tired in the morning, I get a shot of OSX before going to work and designing on my PowerLatte running Frappucino 10.3.

MindFad · Apr 13, 2004, 11:05 PM

Originally posted by Jasoco:
It's called WindowShades, and it was removed in OS X. Look at www.Unsanity.com for a replacement.

Yes, without third-party alternatives, I said. I'd rather have the option in the OS than pay for it and install software to have it.

Link · Apr 15, 2004, 01:12 AM

The annoying part isn't the yearly updates at all, but the fact that they're shifting more and more things over to 'addons'.

There are apps (iPhoto, iTunes, etc), that came with the OS for quite a while which now probably won't due to iLife, which seemingly raises the fee from 129 to 179..

Sure there are new apps, but I don't need a lot of them: imovie and garageband for example

Why they don't make these $19 apps EACH I have no idea. It'd be pretty cool if you could buy them that way as well as in the 'suite'.

If 10.4 has as few updates as 10.3 did, I'll wonder whether it's worth the upgrade fee or not.

Chuckit · Apr 15, 2004, 04:04 AM

Originally posted by MindFad:
Yes, without third-party alternatives, I said. I'd rather have the option in the OS than pay for it and install software to have it.

I'd rather have professional-grade bitmap and vector image editors included with the OS than pay for new software, but I don't think it's all that reasonable to expect Apple to replace Photoshop and Illustrator with iApps.

Honestly, I know how nice it is to get things free, but I don't understand why so many people have such an aversion to third-party software.

shortcipher · Apr 15, 2004, 08:18 AM

Originally posted by MindFad:
Yes, without third-party alternatives, I said. I'd rather have the option in the OS than pay for it and install software to have it.

you are quite right, but considering that Windowshade only costs $7 or thereabouts, I cannot imagine why anybody who wants it wouldnt pay for it, I just spent more than that on lunch.

Gankdawg · Apr 15, 2004, 10:40 AM

Originally posted by Stradlater:
Yeah...with a hardware purchase. So that's not really the price you're paying, now is it?

You could buy a stick of RAM and it counts as hardware.

lngtones · Apr 15, 2004, 03:56 PM

Originally posted by mitchell_pgh:
HARDWARE and SOFTWARE ARE fundamentally different.

Software can be duplicated with ZERO (or very minimal cost)
Hardware can NOT be duplicated at ZERO or minimal costs

If you create a piece of crap software, you can simply deliver a .1 update
With hardware, if you screw it up, it's screwed up

Software can be developed in full, partial and lite versions (all sold at different prices) [Example: FCP, FCE, iMovie]
Hardware doesn't work the same way.

There is an old saying... you can't duplicate bread without a pound of flower. This is the fundamental difference in hardware and software.

This has nothing to do with duplication. It has to do with designing. Building a complex and powerful piece of software like OS X is on the same order of magnitude of building a new computer using their simulators.

It only seems easy because they've done a great job. It's not easy to create something like OS X.

nsxpower · Apr 15, 2004, 04:42 PM

Next Tuesday

MindFad · Apr 15, 2004, 05:15 PM

Originally posted by Chuckit:
I'd rather have professional-grade bitmap and vector image editors included with the OS than pay for new software, but I don't think it's all that reasonable to expect Apple to replace Photoshop and Illustrator with iApps.

Honestly, I know how nice it is to get things free, but I don't understand why so many people have such an aversion to third-party software.

An small option of functionality to the Operating System is what I'm talking about, not new software. I don't think Apple would have to write a whole new piece of software and include it with every computer to have collapsable title bars.

I personally don't have some aversion towards shareware. I think it would be a nice addition to the functionality of Apple's OS, and despite the low-cost solution, I don't want to pay $7 for it. I'm all for Apple including more functional options for their user, and I think they should.

And I wouldn't mind if Apple included a free Photoshop solution.

Spook E · Apr 16, 2004, 12:42 AM

couldnt they just re-badge Gimp and actually make it useable?

lngtones · Apr 16, 2004, 12:53 AM

Originally posted by Spook E:
couldnt they just re-badge Gimp and actually make it useable?

What does re-badge mean?

moonmonkey · Apr 18, 2004, 04:56 AM

Originally posted by lngtones:
What does re-badge mean?

Put an Apple on it.

clebin · Apr 18, 2004, 01:13 PM

I always dread the kind of responses you get in a thread like this. You try and have an adult conversation about whether Apple is doing the right thing with the timing and pricing of upgrades, and you get mentalists who can't see beyond their own circumstances and needs.

Mac applications requiring the newest OS version has been a bigger problem than on Windows ever since Apple embarked on the yearly upgrade cycle and that's a concern to any business that wants to use the MacOS. Also, there are upgrade features that are really bug-fixes and Apple should fix the big bugs for more than just the next release. For those reasons, although we want yearly upgrades because we're fans, if I was an IT manager, would I?

If Apple gave Jaguar users a discount on Tiger, then I think everybody would be a little bit happier and more users would be up to date and would the revenue from OS X be that much lower when you take that into account? Good for Apple, good for us.

Chris

lngtones · Apr 18, 2004, 01:40 PM

Originally posted by clebin:
I always dread the kind of responses you get in a thread like this. You try and have an adult conversation about whether Apple is doing the right thing with the timing and pricing of upgrades, and you get mentalists who can't see beyond their own circumstances and needs.

Or maybe the only "adult" conversation you feel is worthwhile is your own?.

For those reasons, although we want yearly upgrades because we're fans, if I was an IT manager, would I?

I'm not so sure about this, the Windows IT manager at my office loves to install the newest things. He calls them "toys" and if he didn't have new things to install he probably wouldn't have his job in the first place. All they use Excel for is to make lists. You don't need Office 2003 for that. XP? We're using it exactly the same way we used Windows 2000. It even looks exactly the same with the classic skin.

If Apple gave Jaguar users a discount on Tiger, then I think everybody would be a little bit happier.

In the words of a 13 year old girl, DUH. Who doesn't want lower prices. I'm sure Apple's prices aren't arbitrary.

Phil

Jasoco · Apr 18, 2004, 04:14 PM

Quote:
If Apple gave Jaguar users a discount on Tiger, then I think everybody would be a little bit happier.

Actually, I agree here. What the hell ever happened to UPGRADING? Even MICROSOFT lets people upgrade. And their OS costs a lot more! Apple nneds to get a clue. I'd gladly pay $60 to upgrade. $120 if I'm new.

JLL · Apr 18, 2004, 05:00 PM

Originally posted by Jasoco:
Actually, I agree here. What the hell ever happened to UPGRADING? Even MICROSOFT lets people upgrade. And their OS costs a lot more! Apple nneds to get a clue. I'd gladly pay $60 to upgrade. $120 if I'm new.

$129 is the upgrade price. Every Mac owner has a Mac OS license.

ajprice · Apr 18, 2004, 05:15 PM

I'm using 10.2 right now, and I'm happy with it. There is no rule to say you MUST upgrade to every new revision of the OS. I'm staying with 10.2 for now, I'll wait around 'til 10.4 previews/seeds show up, and if there's anything there that makes 10.2 obsolete, or anything that I 'must' have, then I'll consider 10.4. That way, I'll effectively get the 10.3 and 10.4 upgrade combines for the price of 10.4

.

CharlesS · Apr 18, 2004, 06:02 PM

Originally posted by shortcipher:
you are quite right, but considering that Windowshade only costs $7 or thereabouts, I cannot imagine why anybody who wants it wouldnt pay for it, I just spent more than that on lunch.

The problem isn't the price. The problem is that you have to install APE, the OS X equivalent of the old MacOS's extensions. Many people don't want to have that on their system since its entire purpose is to alter other applications' code to make them do things that the designers didn't intend for them to do, potentially introducing instability.