Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Software - Troubleshooting and Discussion > macOS > Do you think Panther will run on all the same hardware as 10.2 does?

View Poll Results: Do you think Panther will run on all the same hardware as 10.2 does?
Poll Options:
Yes 149 votes (78.01%)
No 10 votes (5.24%)
Don't know 7 votes (3.66%)
If you want all the neat stuff no but the bare bones will still intall on older computers 25 votes (13.09%)
Voters: 191. You may not vote on this poll
Do you think Panther will run on all the same hardware as 10.2 does?
Thread Tools
Socially Awkward Solo
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Hanging on the wall at Jabba's Palace
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2003, 04:35 PM
 
Ok I am getting really scared that Apple wants to sell us all new computers and that all the cool things that will be in 10.3 will only run on computers with high MHz and video cards.

Do you think Panther will run on the same beige G3's or older CRT iMac's as 10.2 does?

"Laugh it up, fuzz ball!"
     
voodoo
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Salamanca, EspaƱa
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2003, 04:42 PM
 
I don't care, cuz I am buing a 970 PowerMac when it comes (bundled with 10.3)
I could take Sean Connery in a fight... I could definitely take him.
     
Adam Betts
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: North Hollywood, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2003, 04:48 PM
 
I think the current requirements will stay the same for Panther.

But you may be right, they could be improving Quartz Extreme to make it better than regular Quartz.
     
Socially Awkward Solo  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Hanging on the wall at Jabba's Palace
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2003, 04:52 PM
 
Originally posted by Adam Betts:
I think the current requirements will stay the same for Panther.

But you may be right, they could be improving Quartz Extreme to make it better than regular Quartz.
I have a sick feeling that Apple will say the min video card for install will be what it is now for Quartz Extreme.

"Laugh it up, fuzz ball!"
     
DeathMan
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Capitol City
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2003, 08:17 PM
 
Well its definately possiblity, but I would think that they would support older machines the same way they support them now, as in, this feature won't work on you mac, but things will still run, but its such a great feature, you'll wish you had a new mac, and you can get 90 days same as cash, blah blah blah.
     
sworthy
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2003, 08:23 PM
 
of course current hardware will run it (well, at least relatively current systems). To make an entire user base buy new systems is not the way to attract more business while your systems are already more expensive.

Also, isn't panther supposed to run faster, or be snappier if you will? Wouldn't that mean that the system may actually run faster? *gasp*
     
IonCable
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: GR, MI
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2003, 08:24 PM
 
My guess it will "run" on any Apple computer produced after the first G4s. It will really run on any Mac that has Quartz Extreme. It may be able to be put on the older B&W G3s and the like but I think it will be very wanting and not worth the install.
"This is fun, right?"
     
The Evener
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2003, 08:28 PM
 
I think my trusty tangerine iBook is toast, when it comes to 10.3 that is. I'm really enjoying 10.2, so I'm preparing to stay with this as the top 'o the line for the time being. Actually, I should clarify and say that I think it will "run" on this machine, but the extra bells and whistles won't show up. Already I don't have OpenGL and Quartz Extreme, so it will only get worse over time. Nevertheless, I'm glad to be out of the rat race when it comes to upgrades. I survived for 5 years using a PowerBook 150 with 7.1, so I'm ready for a long-term experience with 10.2.

"Psssst..."
     
moonmonkey
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Australia, the greatest country in the world, (Australians keep telling me).
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2003, 08:42 PM
 
Originally posted by The Evener:
I think my trusty tangerine iBook is toast, when it comes to 10.3 that is. I'm really enjoying 10.2, so I'm preparing to stay with this as the top 'o the line for the time being. Actually, I should clarify and say that I think it will "run" on this machine, but the extra bells and whistles won't show up. Already I don't have OpenGL and Quartz Extreme, so it will only get worse over time. Nevertheless, I'm glad to be out of the rat race when it comes to upgrades. I survived for 5 years using a PowerBook 150 with 7.1, so I'm ready for a long-term experience with 10.2.

You dont have openGL?

Are you sure?
     
Socially Awkward Solo  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Hanging on the wall at Jabba's Palace
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2003, 10:44 PM
 
Well I dunno, when QE came out even the current iBooks at the time didn't support it.

"Laugh it up, fuzz ball!"
     
msuper69
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Columbus, OH
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2003, 11:37 PM
 
Originally posted by Socially Awkward Solo:
Ok I am getting really scared that Apple wants to sell us all new computers and that all the cool things that will be in 10.3 will only run on computers with high MHz and video cards.
Well now that would leave out all current Macs, wouldn't it?

     
lookmark
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2001
Location: NYC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 8, 2003, 11:56 PM
 
Originally posted by Socially Awkward Solo:
I have a sick feeling that Apple will say the min video card for install will be what it is now for Quartz Extreme.
I don't think Quartz Extr. is going to be required for common GUI operations in Aqua just yet.

10.4 or 10.5, though, might be a different story. ; )
     
djjava
Senior User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: MA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 9, 2003, 08:46 AM
 
it better work... I just forked over almost $4000 for my PB17 and accessories... i would hate for it to be obsolete in a few months.... I am not worrying about.
http://www.pardonmyenglish.com "Spreading the Conservative Word...In English Only."
RevA PB17 with Panther, Lacie d2 160gb, 4G iPod, Vectorworks 10.5
     
Anomalous
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Right Here
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 9, 2003, 03:21 PM
 
Originally posted by The Evener:
I think my trusty tangerine iBook is toast, when it comes to 10.3 that is. I'm really enjoying 10.2, so I'm preparing to stay with this as the top 'o the line for the time being. Actually, I should clarify and say that I think it will "run" on this machine, but the extra bells and whistles won't show up. Already I don't have OpenGL and Quartz Extreme, so it will only get worse over time. Nevertheless, I'm glad to be out of the rat race when it comes to upgrades. I survived for 5 years using a PowerBook 150 with 7.1, so I'm ready for a long-term experience with 10.2.
I also am strongly considering staying with 10.2 for the long term. I have an iMac DV and I am running out of money and out of hard disk space, and Panther seems like it wouldn't be worth it. Besides the cost of the upgrade itself, it would also cost a lot to upgrade all my other software to the Panther-compatible versions.
     
Socially Awkward Solo  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Hanging on the wall at Jabba's Palace
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 9, 2003, 04:07 PM
 
Originally posted by Anomalous:
I also am strongly considering staying with 10.2 for the long term. I have an iMac DV and I am running out of money and out of hard disk space, and Panther seems like it wouldn't be worth it.
How in the name of God can you say that when you don't even know what Panther has?!

"Laugh it up, fuzz ball!"
     
AB^2=BCxAC
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: New York
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 9, 2003, 04:23 PM
 
Please, please let them do like 10.1 and let it be a free upgrade, and not another milestone release for cash so close to Jaguar.
"I stand accused, just like you, for being born without a silver spoon." Richard Ashcroft
     
Socially Awkward Solo  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Hanging on the wall at Jabba's Palace
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 9, 2003, 05:04 PM
 
Originally posted by AB^2=BCxAC:
Please, please let them do like 10.1 and let it be a free upgrade, and not another milestone release for cash so close to Jaguar.
I bet you $200 that it will be a full paid upgrade. As it should be.

"Laugh it up, fuzz ball!"
     
MaxPower2k3
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: NYC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 9, 2003, 06:32 PM
 
Originally posted by Socially Awkward Solo:
I bet you $200 that it will be a full paid upgrade. As it should be.
you think it's fair that people who just gave apple several thousand dollars on the latest computer no more than 3 months ago should now have to pay them another $100+ just to have the latest operating system? i think that's absurd. when you but a new computer (even a brand new design/model), you expect everything on it to be up to date as well, and not "old news" in less than 6 months.
     
edddeduck
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: London
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 9, 2003, 07:07 PM
 
Originally posted by MaxPower2k3:
you think it's fair that people who just gave apple several thousand dollars on the latest computer no more than 3 months ago should now have to pay them another $100+ just to have the latest operating system? i think that's absurd. when you but a new computer (even a brand new design/model), you expect everything on it to be up to date as well, and not "old news" in less than 6 months.
Mmm... If you bought a car then 3 months later they release a new model with better features do you go to Ford and say I think that car should be delayed coz mine is out of date too quickly?

I have a 1.25 Dual but less than 2 months later there is a 1.42 Dual....

Welcome to the Computer industry. You don't need 10.3 it's just an improvement if you want it you pay.

Also 10.3 will run fine on current G3 and G4 systems. Why do I know this? Do you think apple is going to kill there entire iBook range as 10.3 not compatible? Nah...

10.3 is like what 10.2 is to 10.1.

Some bits might need new tech but your old tech still works fine. (Like my iBook 600 with its ATI rage card.)

Cheers Edwin
     
DaedalusDX
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Ithaca, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 9, 2003, 07:12 PM
 
Originally posted by MaxPower2k3:
you think it's fair that people who just gave apple several thousand dollars on the latest computer no more than 3 months ago should now have to pay them another $100+ just to have the latest operating system? i think that's absurd. when you but a new computer (even a brand new design/model), you expect everything on it to be up to date as well, and not "old news" in less than 6 months.
Hm. Its annoying to the consumer, but it is fair.

You seem to talk like this is new news. Everyone does this, man. Apple has been doing PAID yearly updates to the operating system going all the way back before OS 8. Microsoft releases operating systems on a regular schedule...

Keep in mind that Apple still has to pay programmers to develop this stuff. Thousands upon thousands of man hours are put into releasing even an update from 10.1 to 10.2, and R&D costs are substantial in that respect. Software is important still... just because you plunked down a few thousand on hardware doesn't entitle you to free software... software costs money too.
     
Socially Awkward Solo  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Hanging on the wall at Jabba's Palace
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 9, 2003, 07:36 PM
 
Originally posted by MaxPower2k3:
you think it's fair that people who just gave apple several thousand dollars on the latest computer no more than 3 months ago should now have to pay them another $100+ just to have the latest operating system? i think that's absurd. when you but a new computer (even a brand new design/model), you expect everything on it to be up to date as well, and not "old news" in less than 6 months.
So 10.3 comes out in septemberish (5 months) and you said 3 months ago someone bought a new computer so by the time 10.3 comes out that will be 8 months old. So yes people should pay.

Apple also has something called software up to date.

"Laugh it up, fuzz ball!"
     
libraryguy
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Urbana, IL
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 9, 2003, 08:14 PM
 
Originally posted by msuper69:
Well now that would leave out all current Macs, wouldn't it?

LOL

"When you do the common things in life in an uncommon way, you will command the attention of the world." -George Washington Carver
     
libraryguy
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Urbana, IL
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 9, 2003, 08:19 PM
 
Originally posted by AB^2=BCxAC:
Please, please let them do like 10.1 and let it be a free upgrade, and not another milestone release for cash so close to Jaguar.
By the time they release Panther, Jaguar will have been released for a year! I guess they could just hold off another 6 months to release Panther...would that make it "worth" it? I don't see how? One big paid upgrade a year...that's how it's been and how it will continue to be. The ONLY reason 10.1 was free was because 10.0 kinda sucked and lacked a lot of basic features and was sloooowww. 10.2 added new features never before seen on a Mac and so will 10.3...so why shouldn't we pay for it?

"When you do the common things in life in an uncommon way, you will command the attention of the world." -George Washington Carver
     
Millennium
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 9, 2003, 08:41 PM
 
Originally posted by edddeduck:
Mmm... If you bought a car then 3 months later they release a new model with better features do you go to Ford and say I think that car should be delayed coz mine is out of date too quickly?
That's not an appropriate metaphor, unfortunately; if a computer is a car, than upgrading the OS is not the same as buying a new car.

However, this would be rather uncool of Apple. Granted, they know we're suckers enough to keep paying through the nose, and they have every legal right to keep doing this. Morally, however, this is not nearly as certain.

Or, to put it another way, while it may be legal for Apple to treat its customers like crap -as it has done for quite some time, and not just in terms of overcharging for upgrades- is it truly the ethical thing to do? At the absolute least, there should be a reduced upgrade price for those who purchased 10.2; this may not be a legal imperative, but it's only fair.
Also 10.3 will run fine on current G3 and G4 systems. Why do I know this? Do you think apple is going to kill there entire iBook range as 10.3 not compatible? Nah...
There is more to a computer's architecture than its chip. It would be more than possible to exclude generations of iBooks previous to the current one.
10.3 is like what 10.2 is to 10.1.
How do you know this? The only people who could legally know this cannot legally talk about it, due to NDA's. Believe it or not, the ones who decide the version numbers in Apple -as with most large software companies- is not the engineering department, but the marketing department. The only factor on deciding is what will best sell.
You are in Soviet Russia. It is dark. Grue is likely to be eaten by YOU!
     
nsxpower
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Barcelona, Spain
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 10, 2003, 03:55 AM
 
It better "run" on my nearly two month old 1Ghz TiBook and I should be able to use all of it features at a speed that does not force me to get a coffee every time I try to do something. IMHO 10.3 should run at acceptable speeds on every machine that is faster then then 500Mhz iceBook - thats the bottom line to me. I can see Apple dropping support for CRT iMacs and Clamshell iBooks since these machines are "reasonably slow" under 10.2 doing everyday tasks already and they are over three years old. Please don't post saying that 10.2 rocks on any of these machines, because you know that its slow but like I said it is acceptable for everyday tasks such as checking e-mail, web blah...
Bottom line is that I do not believe that Apple will fcuk its entire customer base w/ anything less then a dual-G4 MDD machine - doing so will destroy the company IMHO. In a matter of minutes from the annoucement it will loose its customer base outside of the continental United States, because customers outside of the US are treated worse, get less and pay a premium over a premium for Apple products ... we will abandon Apple (I know I will!). Have a nice day everybody
My Blog & Photos
PowerBook (Ti) 1Ghz · 1Gb · 60Gb · SD
     
sniffer
Professional Poster
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Norway (I eat whales)
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 10, 2003, 09:38 AM
 
What makes you guys think that 10.3 will be slower on the same hardware that we curently are running 10.2 on?????? I can't see why you guys even seems to think that way. Regarding minimum specs for panther, there is no reason to think that none QE video cards should become worse with 10.3. Or that the first gen QE cards found in 600-700 ibooks i.e. should become obsolute or worse to make use of QE in Panther. The hard work Apple have done optimizing Quartz (and QE) for the current supported video cards doesn't just go into smoke with a new realize. So far os ten have only become faster over the time, and I can't see why this wouldn't apply to 10.3 as well. Panther is not os 9 to X over again. OS ten can only become "snappier" in my opinion, and I am sure there is room for it. Right? Cheez, you guys are negative.

Sniffer gone old-school sig
     
edddeduck
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: London
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 10, 2003, 05:46 PM
 
Originally posted by Millennium:
That's not an appropriate metaphor, unfortunately; if a computer is a car, than upgrading the OS is not the same as buying a new car.

However, this would be rather uncool of Apple. Granted, they know we're suckers enough to keep paying through the nose, and they have every legal right to keep doing this. Morally, however, this is not nearly as certain.
1. OK the metafor has a hole but still has a point you bought a machine and OS, if you buy a Dell and a new version of XP is released do you get a free copy? NO...

Apple has spend millions of dollars improving the OS and people demand this for free.... I know that if you bought 10.0 and 10.2 you would be miffed at having to by 10.3 as well but, if you had to do that your mac must be very old as you get an up to date OS with new machines.

Also 10.3 Panther is an upgrade not an essential purchase believe it or not your mac will still work without it. Just ask Cipher and OS 9

Or, to put it another way, while it may be legal for Apple to treat its customers like crap -as it has done for quite some time, and not just in terms of overcharging for upgrades- is it truly the ethical thing to do? At the absolute least, there should be a reduced upgrade price for those who purchased 10.2; this may not be a legal imperative, but it's only fair.
2. Why should there be a moral reason to make 10.3 cheaper for people who bought 10.2? I agree it would be nice and get goodwill (I hope they do this) but my main issue was people who expect this to be FREE. If you don't want it, don't buy it 10.2 is now good enough to be called an good OS. 10.1 was free becuase 10.0 was a disaster in terms of speed and useability.


There is more to a computer's architecture than its chip. It would be more than possible to exclude generations of iBooks previous to the current one.
3. About chips yes I agree but from a purely logical sence Apple have changed their OS to a Unix based system that was the big change. 64 bit chips does not mean that suddenly everything does not work on old machines. In alot of cases 64 bit chips have no speed advantage over 32 bit systems.

Also I agree with the fact that all iBooks are different but Apple has a history of machine being able to run new systems on old machines.

Mac Plus runs 7.5.5
7100AV runs 10.2 (not supported)
G3 Tower runs 10.2 (Supported)

Ok support for all things are not as good as a Dual G4 but there is 6 years (i think) between them.

So I made a logical deduction.

Believe it or not, the ones who decide the version numbers in Apple -as with most large software companies- is not the engineering department, but the marketing department. The only factor on deciding is what will best sell.
4. In the posts I assumed everybody thinks that Panther will be 10.3 Anyway,
same case point Apple has got it's new OS stable now logically they will focus on speed and features.


How do you know this? The only people who could legally know this cannot legally talk about it, due to NDA's.
5. How do I know? I don't as I have not seen Panther. I expect to see it at WWDC or soon afterwards. I don't ever publicly comment on pre-release software but looking at what the trends have been that was my guess. (See below for my comments on NDAs)


Finally why so caustic? You are almost inviting me to give the responce I have. Especially about the NDA situation every time somebody makes a comment the answer is always NDA this NDA that...

This rant is not really against you Millennium just against peoples current gripe that they are always being shafted (by Apple) and Apple go out of their way to annoy people.

Edwin
     
cenutrio
Mac Elite
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: missing
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 10, 2003, 05:54 PM
 
It should run in any G3, although performance may be jeopardized.
     
Moonray
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 10, 2003, 10:02 PM
 
Originally posted by cenutrio:
It should run in any G3, although performance may be jeopardized.
Jeopard? I think they're calling it Panther?

-
     
bemayo
Forum Regular
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: The Emerald City
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 10, 2003, 10:46 PM
 
Sigh...always the same arguments about system upgrades. Am I the only one that remembers the dark days of system 7.5x? We went what seemed like several lifetimes with no updates. Then there were the point updates that broke more than they fixed.

Nowadays, we have people complaining because there are too many significant upgrades. Personally, I am ecstatic. I will happily pay for a major upgrade every year, and I hope they continue doing it. As for the price, I think that $129 is fair. All the naysayers who talk about "upgrade prices" could easily be quieted by charging a Microsoftian $199, and then an upgrade price of $129. As has often been said, if you don't think it is worth it, don't buy it. Jaguar is an excellent OS and calling it a "beta" is just trolling.

As far as the actual subject, I don't foresee any change in the supported systems. They have to support the G3 for iBooks, and there is no compelling reason to think that there is any significant work in supporting the other system components going forward, particularly since the OS is so modular. It is always possible that some new advanced feature won't work on all hardware (such as Quartz Extreme), but I don't see any problem with that. What is really intriguing about OS X so far is that it has gotten faster with each release...this is simply the exact opposite of anything else out there (such as Classic Mac OS and Windows).
Bill Mayo
Picking Apples Since '87
IIgs | IIsi | Performa 630/6300 | G3/266 | G4/533x2 | G5/2Gx2 | MacBook 1.83
     
sniffer
Professional Poster
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Norway (I eat whales)
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 11, 2003, 04:52 AM
 
Originally posted by edddeduck:

Also 10.3 Panther is an upgrade not an essential purchase believe it or not your mac will still work without it. Just ask Cipher and OS 9
That's soo true what you points out. Belive it or not, OS 9.2.2 is a desent OS. I just resently testet OS 9.2.2 on a daily basis in a few weeks just to see what I was missing. The lack of iCal, iChat, and some other apps and features made me go back to OS ten again. But to sum it up, being stuck in OS 9 is not the end of the world in my opinion.
Ofcourse you might feel a little left out if you are a mac nerd such as the rest of us.

Sniffer gone old-school sig
     
Superchicken
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Winnipeg
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 11, 2003, 04:58 PM
 
I'm using OS 9 right now.... and I own X.1 after buying X. I decided Jaguar would be to slow on my 333Mhz iMac so I didn't buy it. I'm not mad at Apple though, I fully intend to purchase a new Mac as soon as the next wave of laptops comes out.

upgrades once a year are fine, they're not software that you're intitled to. When nintendo starts packaging newer games with their game cubes are kids allowed to get mad that they weren't able to get the new games with THEIR older game cubes?
     
Hawkeye
Forum Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Raleigh, NC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 11, 2003, 06:02 PM
 
Do you people actually think that Panther will make a brand new 17" PB obsolete or even a brand new G4 tower?

The fact of the matter is that yes, some computers will be made obsolete and some will not support all of the features that Pather brings to the table, but that's life in the computing market.

I have a two year old G4 Power, the first edition. Already it does not run Quartz Extreme, and I expect that it will not support features of Panther. But Panther will not make it obsolete, so if your computer is less than two years old today, I wouldn't sweat it. Sure we might need to upgrade the RAM to get a little speed boost -- I'm only using 512MB and I'm quite happy with speed -- but we won't be running dinosaurs. If your computer is more than two or three years old, then in computing terms it is already obsolete.

Apple's in the business of selling computers, not operating systems. They're perfectly right to create an operating system that will render your 3/4 yr old computer obsolete. It's called "planned obsolesence." This insures that consumers will continue to purchase new products on a regular basis.

Live with it. Like someone said, it happens with cars.
     
CharlesS
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Dec 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 11, 2003, 06:05 PM
 
Originally posted by Millennium:
However, this would be rather uncool of Apple. Granted, they know we're suckers enough to keep paying through the nose, and they have every legal right to keep doing this. Morally, however, this is not nearly as certain.
Mil, your sense of morality is really weird.

Exactly what moral code are you referring to when you go around and call capitalism and getting paid for your work immoral?

I mean, sheesh. Yes, we all like to get stuff for free, but it's not necessary or required. Basically, it works like this:

If a product is free, great.

If it's not, then if the product is worth the money it costs, then buy it.

If the product is not worth the money it costs, people won't buy it, and the price will go down in order to get people to buy it.

Morality has nothing to do with it.
( Last edited by CharlesS; Apr 11, 2003 at 06:11 PM. )

Ticking sound coming from a .pkg package? Don't let the .bom go off! Inspect it first with Pacifist. Macworld - five mice!
     
nobitacu
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 11, 2003, 06:41 PM
 
I'm sure Apple will make sure it will.

Ming
A Proud Mac User Since: 03/24/03
Apple Computer: MacBook 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 3 GB Memory, 120 GB HD
     
Gul Banana
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 13, 2003, 03:52 AM
 
I know I'm happy so far.. I'm sitting in front of a G4/400 (with an upgraded graphics card) right now, and Jaguar runs fine on it; I can even play recent games. That's a machine three years older than the OS.. so I really don't think there's any need to worry if your Mac is within that three-year range. Not to mention the fact that so far, OS X has gotten faster every release.
[vash:~] banana% killall killall
Terminated
     
Mohammed Al-Sabah
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Kuwait
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 13, 2003, 03:38 PM
 
yup i think it will... well it has 2 !!! hehehe i sure hope so!
     
theory
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: May 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 14, 2003, 07:25 PM
 
I really think that panther will work on anything that can run 10.3.
     
DeathMan
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Capitol City
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 14, 2003, 08:51 PM
 
yeah, I agree with the above poster.
     
CollinG3G4
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 14, 2003, 09:34 PM
 
Originally posted by theory:
I really think that panther will work on anything that can run 10.3.
10.3 wont be panther?
     
gralem
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Malaysia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 14, 2003, 09:58 PM
 
dumbest poll ever: what do you think you don't know about something you know nothing about?

[] YES
[] NO
[] MAYBE

We know nothing of the technology behind panther. There is no way to predict what apple will do. We don't even know what version panther will be.

---gralem
     
wtmcgee
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Atlanta, GA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 14, 2003, 10:47 PM
 
do you really think they'd just do a force upgrade and make all of their old stuff obselete, when apple has a long history of keeping their hardware around for a decent ammt of time? i mean geez, they JUST got rid of the first iMacs...
     
I Bent My Wookiee
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Chillin' at the back of the Falcon
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 15, 2003, 01:25 AM
 
Originally posted by wtmcgee:
do you really think they'd just do a force upgrade and make all of their old stuff obselete, when apple has a long history of keeping their hardware around for a decent ammt of time? i mean geez, they JUST got rid of the first iMacs...
Remember how when 10.2 was shipping a good number of the currently selling computers didn't support QE.

"Barwaraaawww"
     
edddeduck
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: London
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 15, 2003, 08:40 AM
 
Originally posted by I Bent My Wookiee:
Remember how when 10.2 was shipping a good number of the currently selling computers didn't support QE.
So what...

They still run 10.2 and alot faster than 10.1 runs. (Although this is only what I have seen on my iBook every day)

Edwin
     
Severed Hand of Skywalker
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: The bottom of Cloud City
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 15, 2003, 12:38 PM
 
Originally posted by edddeduck:
So what...

They still run 10.2 and alot faster than 10.1 runs. (Although this is only what I have seen on my iBook every day)

Edwin
So what? That is exactly my point. If Apple doesn't even FULLY support currently shipping computers how do you think they feel about computers that are 5 years old?

"Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh"
     
   
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:00 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,