Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

MikeM32 · Jul 17, 2002, 01:58 PM

Okay Jaguar is out, but the thing I'm wonderring about is do those of us who own OSX 10.1.x have to actually PAY for this newest manifestation of OSX or can we get it for free?

It seems to me that OSX has a long way to go in development. Plus my old hardware doesn't run OSX so greatly. I'm still running a G3/266 here, and unless OSX Jaguar is a free update I think I'll be sticking with OS 9.x until I get a whole new Mac.

Mike

cwasko · Jul 17, 2002, 02:06 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by MikeM32:
Okay Jaguar is out, but the thing I'm wonderring about is do those of us who own OSX 10.1.x have to actually PAY for this newest manifestation of OSX or can we get it for free?

It seems to me that OSX has a long way to go in development. Plus my old hardware doesn't run OSX so greatly. I'm still running a G3/266 here, and unless OSX Jaguar is a free update I think I'll be sticking with OS 9.x until I get a whole new Mac.

Mike<hr /></blockquote>Just a nit, but Jag will be 'out' on August 24, 2002.

Considering the recent economy and since there was no mention of it, I would expect that Jag will be a full price purchase for all owners (expect for the Up-to-date qualifiers).

Oh well. I'm more bummed about the cost of the Jag OSX Server purchase...

Richard5mith · Jul 17, 2002, 02:20 PM

Didn't either of you watch the keynote or visit the Apple site before posting?

It's August 24th, it's a full blown product, it's $129. Order today. I have.

ImpishLM · Jul 17, 2002, 08:22 PM

I understand the need to charge something, but I think 10.1 users should get a significant discount... especially those of us who bought 10.0 at the outset and spent a year being guinea pigs for Apple.

I more concerned with this than with the .Mac fees, which seem reasonable to me.

Is no one else a bit peeved about this?

TheMosco · Jul 17, 2002, 08:29 PM

I bought 10.0 and got 10.1 for free. I have no problem with buying 10.2. It is not just a bug fix release, it actually adds new features.

fmalloy · Jul 17, 2002, 08:42 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Richard5mith:
Order today. I have.<hr /></blockquote>Which brings us to the age-old question: better to order from the Apple Store, which may ship late, probably not on Sat., or truck on down to your local Fry's/Staples/Micro Center/Apple Retail?

Given past fiascos, I'm going to be at my one of two Apple retail stores bright and early on the 24th.

jfinete · Jul 17, 2002, 08:45 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by ImpishLM:
I understand the need to charge something, but I think 10.1 users should get a significant discount... especially those of us who bought 10.0 at the outset and spent a year being guinea pigs for Apple.
<hr /></blockquote>I've seen other folks say the same thing, and I really don't understand it. You paid full price for 10.0 and six months later got a free upgrade for 10.1. I don't see why people feel entitled to another upgrade.

The people who bought new Macs (or retail copies of OS X) during the past few months are the ones who really got screwed.

dtriska · Jul 17, 2002, 08:47 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by jfinete:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by ImpishLM:
I understand the need to charge something, but I think 10.1 users should get a significant discount... especially those of us who bought 10.0 at the outset and spent a year being guinea pigs for Apple.
<hr /></blockquote>I've seen other folks say the same thing, and I really don't understand it. You paid full price for 10.0 and six months later got a free upgrade for 10.1. I don't see why people feel entitled to another upgrade.

The people who bought new Macs (or retail copies of OS X) during the past few months are the ones who really got screwed.<hr /></blockquote>I don't feel entitled to another free upgrade, but I would like to use these coupons for something.

[email protected] · Jul 17, 2002, 08:49 PM

did anybody notice they changed the minimum recommended system speed to a 400 mhz g3?

your 266 is no longer welcome at the party (it will work but they don't care how slowly anymore).

i _just_ got a 400 mhz b/w g3. whew - it almost went obsolete in 2 weeks. does this mean my 376 mhz g3 7600 won't serve foxinfotainment.com anymore?

Leonard · Jul 17, 2002, 09:47 PM

With all the features and the speed enhancements that OS X 10.2 has, I certainly don't mind paying Apple for their hard work.

atomised · Jul 18, 2002, 02:22 AM

nope, no way should it be a full price experience for those of us that have been enjoying the buggy experience that has been osx. in many respects this release seems to be the first one without the enourmous amount of problems! windows offered a discount to prior users for a xp system that worked well from the start (and i don't even like windows)!

almost everything about this macworld, apart from itunes, has left a very bad taste in my mouth.

i would have thought a company like apple would not take such a careless attitude to its small comsumer base...

iRei · Jul 18, 2002, 02:30 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by [email protected]:
did anybody notice they changed the minimum recommended system speed to a 400 mhz g3?

your 266 is no longer welcome at the party (it will work but they don't care how slowly anymore).

i _just_ got a 400 mhz b/w g3. whew - it almost went obsolete in 2 weeks. does this mean my 376 mhz g3 7600 won't serve foxinfotainment.com anymore?

<hr /></blockquote><img border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" title="" src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" /> Where did this come from? Here a quote from Apple's site:
"Confirm that your hardware can run Mac OS X Version 10.2 Jaguar
Mac OS X Version 10.2 requires a Power Mac G3, G4, G4 Cube; iMac; PowerBook G3, G4; iBook; or eMac computer; at least 128MB of physical RAM and a built-in display or a display connected to an Apple-supplied video card. Mac OS X does not support the original PowerBook G3 or processor upgrade cards. Verify your hardware is supported from the list below."
<a href="http://www.apple.com/macosx/upgrade/requirements.html" target="_blank">http://www.apple.com/macosx/upgrade/requirements.html</a>

mism · Jul 18, 2002, 05:47 AM

Having paid for the public beta, paid for the original release of 10 and bought a Dual G4 two months ago I resent having to pay $129 for 10.2. Fair enough new users should have to pay, but I don't want a new copy of OS 10, I want to upgrade OS10. If I upgrade photoshop, illustrator, whatever, I pay an upgrade fee, not the cost of the full version.
Add to this that many of us have been early adopters, giving feedback, putting up with bugs/lack of functionality.
Nevertheless, I'll be ordering my copy today.

Ron Goodman · Jul 18, 2002, 09:24 AM

If you paid for 10.0, how did you pay for the Public Beta? I got a $30 rebate toward 10.0 after buying the Beta. I've been running OS X for nearly two years--paying for a new version seems fair to me.

booboo · Jul 18, 2002, 09:25 AM

What do we do if there isn't a cheap 10.2 upgrade?

10.1 was OK for me at home, but as far as I'm concerned it just wasn't ready to replace 9 for most of the people I advise: too many spinning wheels, too slow window resizing, odd glitches here and there.

Also, I've been waiting for pro audio app's (Logic/Cubase SX/ProTools) and I suspect that these just won't work with 10.1 - due to fairly oft-rumoured issues in Core Audio, we shall see - so I suspect that I have no choice but to buy 10.2

It seems to me that I am being penalised for having bought and supported Apple's Mac OS X since the Public Beta days, and I'm not pleased about it.

Sure therre are new app's with 10.2, but the 10.2 OS itself is all I'm really concerned with - and it should be available in the same way 10.1 was. I.e. as a 'free' upgrade, even if proof of purchase is required. Whatever.

KaptainKaya · Jul 18, 2002, 10:17 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Ron Goodman:
If you paid for 10.0, how did you pay for the Public Beta? I got a $30 rebate toward 10.0 after buying the Beta. I've been running OS X for nearly two years--paying for a new version seems fair to me.<hr /></blockquote>I paid for the PB, paid $39 ($69 education discount minus the $30 for the PB), and got 10.1 for free. I'm ordering 10.2 with my education discount again for the low price of $69

jcarr · Jul 18, 2002, 10:23 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by [email protected]:
i _just_ got a 400 mhz b/w g3. whew - it almost went obsolete in 2 weeks.<hr /></blockquote>I hate to be the one to break it to you, but the blue & white Power Macintosh G3 was out of date quite a while ago.

mism · Jul 18, 2002, 10:32 AM

"If you paid for 10.0, how did you pay for the Public Beta? I got a $30 rebate toward 10.0 after buying the Beta."

There was no rebate here in the UK.

"I've been running OS X for nearly two years--paying for a new version seems fair to me. "

I'd been running illustrator 8 for years, but the upgrade to 10 was exactly that, an upgrade, at 1/3 the cost of a full version.

No other software I use requires me to pay for a full version rather than an upgrade. Add to that the fact that it is only recently that OS 10 has become a viable product in our working environment and the fact that there are still issues with it that many users would not be happy to put up with.

Don't missunderstand me, I will buy OS 10.2, I can't wait. I have been impressed with OS 10 and congratulate apple for all they have done, but its a .1 upgrade.

booboo · Jul 18, 2002, 02:39 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by KaptainKaya:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Ron Goodman:
If you paid for 10.0, how did you pay for the Public Beta? I got a $30 rebate toward 10.0 after buying the Beta. I've been running OS X for nearly two years--paying for a new version seems fair to me.<hr /></blockquote>I paid for the PB, paid $39 ($69 education discount minus the $30 for the PB), and got 10.1 for free. I'm ordering 10.2 with my education discount again for the low price of $69

<hr /></blockquote>OK it seems far to you. But would it seem fair to you if you did not have your educational discount, if you'd bought a new Mac a couple of months ago, and if the app's you'd been waiting for (probably) won't work with 10.1.

Sometiimes you have to look outside of how things affect you personally.

JLL · Jul 18, 2002, 02:50 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by mism:
Don't missunderstand me, I will buy OS 10.2, I can't wait. I have been impressed with OS 10 and congratulate apple for all they have done, but its a .1 upgrade.<hr /></blockquote>Would it have made any difference if Apple had called it 10.5?

barney ntd · Jul 18, 2002, 03:31 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by mism:
"If you paid for 10.0, how did you pay for the Public Beta? I got a $30 rebate toward 10.0 after buying the Beta."

There was no rebate here in the UK.
<hr /></blockquote>Yes there was: I got one.

Barney.

pathogen · Jul 18, 2002, 03:47 PM

Apple is trying to do a transition to OS X, and most of their user base still uses OS 9 or earlier as their default (even though they might have OS X installed). If you ask me, making customers pay twice to use OS X in the first year is not good business practise for a company trying to convert a user base.

If I were a company writing and selling inexpensive programs for OS X, I'd be pissed that Apple is asking its customers to pay more to use my product. Especially if my program was counting on an update with Jaguar.

Imagine if Real One didn't work on 10.1 and you needed to buy 10.2, could you imagine the uproar?

::maroma:: · Jul 18, 2002, 04:02 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by atomised:
nope, no way should it be a full price experience for those of us that have been enjoying the buggy experience that has been osx. in many respects this release seems to be the first one without the enourmous amount of problems! windows offered a discount to prior users for a xp system that worked well from the start (and i don't even like windows)!

almost everything about this macworld, apart from itunes, has left a very bad taste in my mouth.

i would have thought a company like apple would not take such a careless attitude to its small comsumer base...<hr /></blockquote>You chose to buy 10.0, knowing that it was pretty slow and buggy. Who's fault is that? Not Apple's. They didn't force you to buy it. Just like they aren't forcing you to buy 10.2. If you don't want to pay full price, wait a few months until the price drops, or wait until you feel like the upgrade is worth the $120.

All this complaining is pretty funny to me. If I thought Apple was charging way too much for this upgrade, I wouldn't buy it. How hard is that? My money (or lack thereof) speaks 100x louder than ranting and raving in forums. Sheesh.

JLL · Jul 18, 2002, 04:18 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by pathogen:
Apple is trying to do a transition to OS X, and most of their user base still uses OS 9 or earlier as their default (even though they might have OS X installed). If you ask me, making customers pay twice to use OS X in the first year is not good business practise for a company trying to convert a user base.<hr /></blockquote>First year? AFAIK Mac OS X 10.0 was released March 24.

pathogen · Jul 18, 2002, 07:12 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by JLL:
AFAIK Mac OS X 10.0 was released March 24.<hr /></blockquote>Oh sorry. I should have written "between now and 1 and 1/3 year ago", not just "in the first year". So, does that change that anyone who bought 10.0 or a new mac between Aug 24, 2001 and July 16th, 2002 will be potentially paying full price for the latest OS X twice in the same year? <img border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" title="" src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" />

[ 07-18-2002, 07:18 PM: Message edited by: pathogen ]

stoneage · Jul 18, 2002, 10:03 PM

I agree. You should have given current 10 users a discount, Apple. 10.1.5 is working fine for me, and will have to do until the price comes down. Bad move. SORRY.

jfinete · Jul 19, 2002, 12:21 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by pathogen:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by JLL:
AFAIK Mac OS X 10.0 was released March 24.<hr /></blockquote>Oh sorry. I should have written "between now and 1 and 1/3 year ago", not just "in the first year". So, does that change that anyone who bought 10.0 or a new mac between Aug 24, 2001 and July 16th, 2002 will be potentially paying full price for the latest OS X twice in the same year? <img border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" title="" src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" /> <hr /></blockquote>Would you rather Apple take longer to develop and release 10.2? If it makes you feel better, you can wait until next March to buy your copy of Jaguar.

Recent purchasers deserve a discount, but you guys who bought 10.0 or the public beta are kidding yourselves.

mism · Jul 19, 2002, 06:29 AM

"Would it have made any difference if Apple had called it 10.5?"

probably, but clearly they don't think its worthy of being .5 and nor do I . Yes there are new features but for me this upgrade is about making OS 10 fully functional (I need to print massive illustrator files, not organise my calenders). 10.2 is the product we should have got when we bought the original OS 10. This is an upgrade, NO other software I use (photoshop, illustrator, freehand, Cinema 4D) charges full price for an upgrade. Its �100, thats nothing in the scheme of things, its not even my money, its my bosses. But that isn't the point.

"You chose to buy 10.0, knowing that it was pretty slow and buggy. Who's fault is that? Not Apple's. They didn't force you to buy it. Just like they aren't forcing you to buy 10.2. "

Thats a fairly lazy argument. A lot of us like apple, we support apple, apple do better because of this, we pay to beta test their software, we put up with bugs etc because we believe in what they are doing. Of course we wern't forced to buy OS10, but if we hadn't who would have?

"There was no rebate here in the UK.

Yes there was: I got one."

I obviously missed that, I remember talk on macuser that there wouldn't be one, guess I gave up on it without looking hard enough.

cutterjohn · Jul 19, 2002, 10:01 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by TheMosco:
I bought 10.0 and got 10.1 for free. I have no problem with buying 10.2. It is not just a bug fix release, it actually adds new features.<hr /></blockquote>hate to burst your bubble buddy, but they're jsut coming back into OS9 feature parity range. Not much new unless you consider/actually use the ibloat apps.

Now as to OS pricing here is what I think that Apple should do:
Make each ibloat app something like $30/free with new machine.

Make the OS basic $50 plus a nice comprehensive printed manual being at LEAST as useful as SuSE's, plus no ibloat. $25 without printed manual. (I bet alot more people would be "up-to-date" if the OS price were more reasonable.

Either leave the dev tools free(no printed docs) or $50 plus nice printed documentation, just depends upon what the real strategy is, I'd assume that would be free at least until/if they get a significantly larger market share.

[ 07-19-2002, 10:15 AM: Message edited by: cutterjohn ]

Fotek2001 · Jul 19, 2002, 12:04 PM

I don't see what the problem is. Apple has always charged for major OS upgrades irrespective of version number. OS 7.6, 8.5 and 9.0 were all paid upgrades and with the amount of major, system level, revisions in 10.2 I think Apple is quite justified in charging full price.

I also don't count the iApps (which are hardly what I'd call bloated) as part of the deal. iApps are cool but the difference in the core functionality of the OS between 10.0 and 10.2 is almost as big as the difference between 8.0 and 9.0 and it's a change I'm happy to pay for given I've paid once for OS X in March 2001.

Zadian · Jul 19, 2002, 12:25 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by cutterjohn:
hate to burst your bubble buddy, but they're jsut coming back into OS9 feature parity range.[/QB]<hr /></blockquote>I didn't know that Mac OS 9 hat IPv6, handwriting recognition, support for spellchecking in many languages, smb sharing and browsing in the finder, ftp browsing in the finder, rendezvous.

I might reconsider using Mac OS 9

Oh yes i forgot springloaded folders - now thats really the most important part of Mac OS 9 - besides windowshade

cutterjohn · Jul 19, 2002, 06:23 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Zadian:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by cutterjohn:
hate to burst your bubble buddy, but they're jsut coming back into OS9 feature parity range.<hr /></blockquote>I didn't know that Mac OS 9 hat IPv6, handwriting recognition, support for spellchecking in many languages, smb sharing and browsing in the finder, ftp browsing in the finder, rendezvous.

I might reconsider using Mac OS 9

Oh yes i forgot springloaded folders - now thats really the most important part of Mac OS 9 - besides windowshade

[/QB]<hr /></blockquote>you forgot usb print sharing.

ok now on here:
seriously: you're going to use the HWR? WTF for? and more importantly where? It'll be kind of useless without some sort of pad like most CAD people use and some artists. It WOULD be a feature if it WERE on a webpad like device, but it's not, so I don't care. Won't use it on a desktop/notebook which is what I have. I use it on a Newton where it is a feature and IS appropriate.

IPv6: oh yeah, thats really useful, and is likely to be really useful in the next decade, or even before I upgrade hardware.

spellchecking: BFD. My spelling is, generally, very good. Additionally I know very well when I am not likely spelling a word correctly and look it up, so spellchecker always get turned off by me, which also has the slight side effect of a speed boost. (Was already here anyways.)

rendezvous: don't need/want. wouldn't use unless I had no other choice. more fluff. Getting to be as bad as windoze with this crap. i.e. I've already got a network, have had one for 8 years, etc. My care will be: how do I turn off this cruft without rendering other things unusable.

smb shares: gee, I already do that. silly me, I must already have 10.2.

finder browse smb: do that too, silly me, I must have 10.2 already.

ftp in finder: why? i.e. don't be an imbecile.

did I miss any? all non-features to me so far. Like I said, I don't give a rat's behind about the gumby "features." I do like spring loaded folders sometimes. I do miss easier USB printer sharing, but fixed that with lpd package & filters.

What irritates me in the near complete non-optimization of OSX 10.0 - .1.x. The crappy finder in same. So to fix the two things I care about/get the most benefit from I get to pay again?

Forget it, you and people like are the little blind Apple zealots that have turned off so many people on apple over the years. I like apple, I like OSX, but really, and seriously OSX10.2 offers me jack other than MUCH needed/should have been done for 10.0 optimizations. All the stuff you listed I don't care about/use or have already done myself, or could obtain and compile source code projects that would do the same. Just isn't worth $129 to me. Maybe $50, but not $129. Sticking with 10.1.5 until I see something worth upgrading for, maybe I'll even spend the $130 on XP pro to play with.

BTW: to other poster: There WAS a big difference between 8.6 & 9?! Must've missed it. Now there WAS a big difference between 6 & 7, and 7 & 8, but 8 & 9? come on.

10.0 and 10.2: difference: get real, don't buy the hype that Apple is pushing. Most of the stuff they list isn't even a feature as far as I'm concerned. (see above)

Like I've said elsewhere, Java 1.4 would be a feature, HFS+ actually honoring case would be a feature, but not rendezvous, not ichat, etc. etc. I'm not even certain how much use the general optimizations would be to me anyways, as I no longer have cutting edge hw. (Not hard with apple stuff.) So that might not even be a feature, and I'd damned well be extremely pissed if I got a bunch of junk, sorry "features" and no general speed improvement, and resource management improvement. After the first two "releases" of OSX I'm just a little gun shy of ponying up $130 for a question mark.

[ 07-19-2002, 07:00 PM: Message edited by: cutterjohn ]

cutterjohn · Jul 19, 2002, 06:25 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Fotek2001:
I don't see what the problem is. Apple has always charged for major OS upgrades irrespective of version number. OS 7.6, 8.5 and 9.0 were all paid upgrades and with the amount of major, system level, revisions in 10.2 I think Apple is quite justified in charging full price.

I also don't count the iApps (which are hardly what I'd call bloated) as part of the deal. iApps are cool but the difference in the core functionality of the OS between 10.0 and 10.2 is almost as big as the difference between 8.0 and 9.0 and it's a change I'm happy to pay for given I've paid once for OS X in March 2001.<hr /></blockquote>iapp = time & money someone spent on iapp rather than the OS.

[ 07-19-2002, 07:05 PM: Message edited by: cutterjohn ]

JLL · Jul 19, 2002, 06:42 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by cutterjohn:
Forget it, you and people like are the little blind Apple zealots that have turned off so many people on apple over the years. I like apple, I like OSX, but really, and seriously OSX10.2 offers me jack other than MUCH needed/should have been done for 10.0 optimizations. All the stuff you listed I don't care about/use or have already done myself, or could obtain and compile source code projects that would do the same. Just isn't worth $129 to me. Maybe $50, but not $129. Sticking with 10.1.5 until I see something worth upgrading for, maybe I'll even spend the $130 on XP pro to play with.<hr /></blockquote>Why is it that when people don't agree with others that are mad at Apple they are zealots?

If 10.2 doesn't offer you much then don't upgrade (as you said).

But then you want to upgrade to XP Pro (from Win2000 I guess)? And XP is so much better than 2000 that it's worth the money - just to play with?

JLL · Jul 19, 2002, 06:44 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by cutterjohn:
iapp = time someone spent on iapp rather than the OS.<hr /></blockquote>Yep, Apple only have one kind of programmers that work on every project that Apple has.

They are two different divisions!

cutterjohn · Jul 19, 2002, 07:03 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by JLL:
Why is it that when people don't agree with others that are mad at Apple they are zealots?

If 10.2 doesn't offer you much then don't upgrade (as you said).

But then you want to upgrade to XP Pro (from Win2000 I guess)? And XP is so much better than 2000 that it's worth the money - just to play with?[/QB]<hr /></blockquote>you bet. Because if Apple is expecting me to pony up $129 for every trivial release, I'd like to at least really try out XP Pro before deciding to go with either a Sun Blade or two new self-built cheap x86 boxes running XP Pro & FreeBSD.

And actually the fact of the matter with XP is: how much longer will software continue to work with it? I really really dislike Windows, but it's been several years since I gave MS $130, unlike Apple, who have gotten LOTS more.

[ 07-19-2002, 07:09 PM: Message edited by: cutterjohn ]

JLL · Jul 19, 2002, 07:15 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by cutterjohn:
I really really dislike Windows, but it's been several years since I gave MS $130, unlike Apple, who have gotten LOTS more.<hr /></blockquote>Well you have nobody but yourself to blame for that.

[email protected] · Jul 19, 2002, 07:41 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />
quote:

Originally posted by [email protected]:
did anybody notice they changed the minimum recommended system speed to a 400 mhz g3?

your 266 is no longer welcome at the party (it will work but they don't care how slowly anymore).

i _just_ got a 400 mhz b/w g3. whew - it almost went obsolete in 2 weeks. does this mean my 376 mhz g3 7600 won't serve foxinfotainment.com anymore?

Where did this come from? Here a quote from Apple's site:
"Confirm that your hardware can run Mac OS X Version 10.2 Jaguar
Mac OS X Version 10.2 requires a Power Mac G3, G4, G4 Cube; iMac; PowerBook G3, G4; iBook; or eMac computer; at least 128MB of physical RAM and a built-in display or a display connected to an Apple-supplied video card. Mac OS X does not support the original PowerBook G3 or processor upgrade cards. Verify your hardware is supported from the list below."
<a href="http://www.apple.com/macosx/upgrade/requirements.html" target="_blank">http://www.apple.com/macosx/upgrade/requirements.html</a>
<hr /></blockquote>but i swear, i read it...somewhere...

<blockquote>quote:<hr />

quote:

Originally posted by [email protected]:
i _just_ got a 400 mhz b/w g3. whew - it almost went obsolete in 2 weeks.

I hate to be the one to break it to you, but the blue & white Power Macintosh G3 was out of date quite a while ago.
<hr /></blockquote>ya, i know, but i've been serving off my 7600 for a while, and i thought the g3/400 would be 'officially' supported for a while...

i guess it will, after all. it's not that slow. actually, exept for graphics, the 7600 isn't that slow either. it's just not supported and a bitch to install.

iRei · Jul 19, 2002, 09:51 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by cutterjohn:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by JLL:
Why is it that when people don't agree with others that are mad at Apple they are zealots?

If 10.2 doesn't offer you much then don't upgrade (as you said).

But then you want to upgrade to XP Pro (from Win2000 I guess)? And XP is so much better than 2000 that it's worth the money - just to play with?<hr /></blockquote>you bet. Because if Apple is expecting me to pony up $129 for every trivial release, I'd like to at least really try out XP Pro before deciding to go with either a Sun Blade or two new self-built cheap x86 boxes running XP Pro & FreeBSD.

And actually the fact of the matter with XP is: how much longer will software continue to work with it? I really really dislike Windows, but it's been several years since I gave MS $130, unlike Apple, who have gotten LOTS more.[/QB]<hr /></blockquote>Thats right And you will only have to give MS $200 every two years id you want the next upgrade to the next Win?? Pro version.

Zadian · Jul 20, 2002, 06:59 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by cutterjohn:
you forgot usb print sharing.<hr /></blockquote>Oh, yes - that's actually a useful.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by cutterjohn:
seriously: you're going to use the HWR? WTF for?
(...)

IPv6: oh yeah, thats really useful,
(...)

spellchecking: BFD. My spelling is, generally, very good.
(...)

rendezvous: don't need/want.
(...)

more fluff. Getting to be as bad as windoze with this crap.<hr /></blockquote>As i understand you only things that you want and need are new? Oh, sorry didn't know that. I thought that everything that isn't in Mac OS 10.1 or 9 is new.

I think some of the new features are useful but that's not the point.

 <blockquote>quote:<hr />
smb shares: gee, I already do that. silly me, I must already have 10.2.
<hr /></blockquote>SMB sharing - being able to share folders via smb, that's new and not in Mac OS 10.1 or 9.

 <blockquote>quote:<hr />
finder browse smb: do that too, silly me, I must have 10.2 already.
<hr /></blockquote>In Mac OS 10.1 you are able to mount smb shares if you know the address of the host and the name of the share. In 10.2 the existing shares are just shown in the "connect to server..." dialog. That's new.

 <blockquote>quote:<hr />
ftp in finder: why? i.e. don't be an imbecile.
<hr /></blockquote>Why not? It's a new feature - that's all.

 <blockquote>quote:<hr />
did I miss any? all non-features to me so far.
<hr /></blockquote>Oh, these "non-features" are features, they are new and everything else is your opinion.

 <blockquote>quote:<hr />
Forget it, you and people like are the little blind Apple zealots that have turned off so many people on apple over the years.
<hr /></blockquote>*lol* Sure, by stating that there are new features - regardless of their usefulness - makes me a blind apple zealot.