[allap]

This is probably a stupid question, but will we have to pay for OSX 10.3 like we did for jaguar? It's ridiculous that we'd have to pay another 100$-200$ for an 0.1 update.

[wataru]

Originally posted by allap:
It's ridiculous that we'd have to pay another 100$-200$ for an 0.1 update.

The number value of the increase has little to do with what changes. Keep in mind that Apple wants to keep the whole "ten" thing going as long as possible, so things that might have warranted large version increases in "classic" Mac OS will not have as big an effect on the OS X version number.

And from what I've heard, 10.3 will be a paid upgrade.

[tmikkelsen]

Originally posted by allap:
This is probably a stupid question, but will we have to pay for OSX 10.3 like we did for jaguar? It's ridiculous that we'd have to pay another 100$-200$ for an 0.1 update.

This is starting to get really stupid. .1 updates for X are like major updates in classic. Just like you had to pay for 7.5, 8, 8.5, and 9, you will have to pay for major feature upgrades in X too. If it's to much for you, than don't buy it. Not to mention that this is a little premature, there hasn't even been a demo yet.

[clarkgoble]

Whether we pay will likely depend upon what features are added. If the next major release has what I think it will include the following:

New Help System (with Gecko?)
New iApp upgrades (iPhoto, iMovie, iCal, iChat)
Improved Finder (Lables, better preview, better multithreading, better FTP support)
64-bit capable
New file system

I don't think we'll see that until the 970 comes out. Likely in September. And yes I think we'll probably have to pay $100 or so. I think it would easily be worth it as well.

In the mean time I think they will continue to add features. I personally think that 10.3 will be free and won't be the major upgrade. But I don't find the numbering to be that significant. What counts is what is in each upgrade.

In the December developer tools they had some nice additions to Applescript that will likely be rolled into the main system. I suspect Java 1.4 will be as well. I'm hoping that an Aqua TCL/TK will be available so that most of the windowing code for Python and Perl will work without X11. I'm not counting on it though. But that *might* make it into one of the next versions. That would help scripting the system as well as it would make it easy to convert administration tools over to OSX versions.

[unfaded]

My theory....

Odd .x updates will be free.

Even will be paid.

10.0 = paid (sorta)
10.1 = free
10.2 = paid
10.3 = free

etc etc. i'd worry more about 10.4 than 10.3

[MickS]

Originally posted by unfaded:
My theory....
10.1 = free

Not quite free, you had to pay for shipping unless you could get to a dealer that had the free CDs. I think that the only reason for this was that the performance of 10.0 sucked so badly that Apple wanted to placate the people knocking it.

That said I would expect 10.3 to be a minimal charge update from Jag. If you want to upgrade from 10.0 or 10.1 it will be a full charge.

[Nebrie]

Its been stated that it's gonna be paid/free/paid/free/paid/free etc.

[Peter]

I would happily pay �100 for the update, if Apple was making improvements I would buy it. When was the last time you bought a Mac OS upgrade and thought "wow what a waste of money"?

[KaptainKaya]

Originally posted by PeterClark2002:
I would happily pay �100 for the update, if Apple was making improvements I would buy it. When was the last time you bought a Mac OS upgrade and thought "wow what a waste of money"?

OS 9.

[Cipher13]

This is stupid.

I don't care if Apple rewrite OSX in FORTAN just to impress us, there's no way in hell I'm paying for 10.3.

I paid for 10, I paied for 10.2, Apple can blow me if they don't think I'm pirating the next one.

[Moose]

Originally posted by Nebrie:
Its been stated that it's gonna be paid/free/paid/free/paid/free etc.

Uh. By whom? Apple hasn't released any sort of pricing details for 10.3, much less any further upgrades.

Not that I'm saying that 10.3 is guaranteed not to be "free," but you should probably wait a couple more development cycles before trying to read too deeply into the tea leaves for patterns.

10.0 - Paid. Duh. The initial product.
10.1 - Somewhat major update. Anything that requires a new CD can be considered "major." It was free. Okay.
10.2 - Quite major update. The OS can now be considered release quality. I feel okay about recommending it to people who I don't want to visit very often in order to fix their ****. Paid.

We've seen only two updates thus far. One happened to be free, the other happened to be paid. This really isn't enough to establish a pattern. All you're doing is setting yourself up for disappointment should Apple decide to charge for 10.3.

"But they said it'd be free!" No. They didn't. You may have read it on a rumor site. Apple has not committed to anything with respect to pricing for 10.3. Apple makes the product. Apple gets to set the pricing. If you don't like it, nobody's holding a gun to your head forcing you to buy it. Don't buy it. Pirate it. I don't give a ****. Just stop whining about every single thing Apple does.

If you constantly find yourself at odds with every major decision your computer vendor makes, perhaps you should be looking for a different one. If enough Apple customers revolt and leave the platform instead of effectively telling Steve Jobs, "I really hate what you're doing, but I'm going to be your bitch anyway," that's sending the completely wrong message—both to him, and to the world at large.

[Mac Zealot]

I *REALLY* would have to think about it.

10.2 is VERY fast on this computer, faster than windows XP on a 3.4ghz pentium 4.

But meh, an update is an update

[macmike42]

Originally posted by Mac Zealot:
10.2 is VERY fast on this computer, faster than windows XP on a 3.4ghz pentium 4.

We'll take you real seriously, considering you use Windows XP on a processor that doesn't exist.

[dfiler]

Originally posted by Nebrie:
Its been stated that it's gonna be paid/free/paid/free/paid/free etc.

Nuh-huh! You didn't get the memo?

Upgrade charging is now dictated by the Fibonacci sequence.
Paid Paid Paid Free Paid Free Free Paid Free Free Free Free Paid ...

[Peter]

Originally posted by dfiler:
Nuh-huh! You didn't get the memo?

Upgrade charging is now dictated by the Fibonacci sequence.
Paid Paid Paid Free Paid Free Free Paid Free Free Free Free Paid ...

can you imagine the board meetings? "hmm we need to decide wether the next update is free, let me see..." Im think the good old einy meiny meiny mo .
I've never realy thought Apple would make up a silly sequence for pricing of updates, an update is an update .

[Coxy]

I don't remember *anyone* correctly predicting 10.2's pricing scheme in the months leading up to release, not on the MAF, anyway.

Anything you don't hear from Apple is just rumour/speculation -- but you don't need me to tell you that!

[Cipher13]

Originally posted by Mac Zealot:
I *REALLY* would have to think about it.

10.2 is VERY fast on this computer, faster than windows XP on a 3.4ghz pentium 4.

But meh, an update is an update

Yeah right. In our dreams.

[aenemated]

if you're concerned about this, you're a wanker. if you're going to make stupid comments like 'i won't pay it!' you're also a wanker.

[Fdanna]

Originally posted by aenemated:
if you're concerned about this, you're a wanker. if you're going to make stupid comments like 'i won't pay it!' you're also a wanker.

(we)Americans shouldn't say "wanker," "cheers," or any other British terms. It just sounds stupid with the wrong accent.

Needless to say, I'm not paying.

[hudson1]

What Apple did say in an interview after 10.2 was released (Tevanian?) that the public should probably expect to pay for an upgrade nominally every 18 months. No, it wasn't a concrete statement but one could have taken it to be a semi-official expectation if not a statement.

[KaptainKaya]

Originally posted by hudson1:
What Apple did say in an interview after 10.2 was released (Tevanian?) that the public should probably expect to pay for an upgrade nominally every 18 months. No, it wasn't a concrete statement but one could have taken it to be a semi-official expectation if not a statement.

So maybe 10.3 will be released 18 months after 10.2?

[SMacTech]

Originally posted by Cipher13:
This is stupid.

I don't care if Apple rewrite OSX in FORTAN just to impress us, there's no way in hell I'm paying for 10.3.

I paid for 10, I paied for 10.2, Apple can blow me if they don't think I'm pirating the next one.

They will just ignore you, let alone perform something as absurd as you suggest.
Maybe in your dreams they will.

[diamondsw]

Originally posted by allap:
This is probably a stupid question, but will we have to pay for OSX 10.3 like we did for jaguar? It's ridiculous that we'd have to pay another 100$-200$ for an 0.1 update.

Troll.

This has been discussed to death,and to sum up - all the way back to 7.0, every other update is free. Just call Jaguar 10.5 instead and it all makes sense. Remember, Apple didn't decide what to number it until the end, and went with 10.2 only becuase they don't want their "X" message dilluted by hitting Mac OS X 11.0.

[godzookie2k]

Cipher and the rest of the non-paying crowd:

You are forgetting that apple owes you nothing, and you aren't bound by god to pick up and use X.3 either....get my point?

[ringo]

Originally posted by allap:
This is probably a stupid question, but will we have to pay for OSX 10.3 like we did for jaguar? It's ridiculous that we'd have to pay another 100$-200$ for an 0.1 update.

But in your iBook thread, you said you bought in September...meaning you wouldn't have paid extra for 10.2 at all.

Hmmm...

[godzookie2k]

Originally posted by ringo:
But in your iBook thread, you said you bought in September...meaning you wouldn't have paid extra for 10.2 at all.

Hmmm...

hehehehehheh BUSTED!

[mark9939]

This is stupid.

I don't care if Apple rewrite OSX in FORTAN just to impress us, there's no way in hell I'm paying for 10.3.

I paid for 10, I paied for 10.2, Apple can blow me if they don't think I'm pirating the next one.

If you don't like paying for the updates, then don't; go to Windows where you only have to pay for OS updates every couple years..... (you get service packs for free)

By the way, OSX piraters, please don't complain about Apple's products or prices, because you're not helping them at all by not purchasing the OS.

[allap]

hehe nice observation ringo, no i didn't have to go buy the jaguar box but i think the 3000$ i dished out should cover it nicely besides when i was mistakenly under the impression that 10.3 was coming around shortly, as in a month or two.

This is the third time in 2 days that i've been called a troll

[Anomalous]

Originally posted by Cipher13:
This is stupid.

I don't care if Apple rewrite OSX in FORTAN just to impress us, there's no way in hell I'm paying for 10.3.

I paid for 10, I paied for 10.2, Apple can blow me if they don't think I'm pirating the next one.

I totally agree, except that I would be more likely to stick with 10.2 than to pirate software.

[ngrundy]

Originally posted by allap:
This is probably a stupid question, but will we have to pay for OSX 10.3 like we did for jaguar? It's ridiculous that we'd have to pay another 100$-200$ for an 0.1 update.

Ok so I'm fresh to the mac platform so feel free to call me a noob or something lame like that.

now if we look at the latest version of windows (XP) it is version 5.1 of the operating system, windows 2000 was version 5.0, sweet jesus strike me dead it's a .1 update that here in australia would set you back 600 dollars for the professional version (i know i needed to buy it because i used a SMP desktop at the time)

if you want to use the service pack terms for OSX then what do you call the 10.x.1 releases?

lets see i'd say windows nt4 had 6 service packs, and sofar win2k has had 2 service packs.

if you want to carry the anology accross 10.1 had 5 service packs OS9.2 had 2 service packs, and 10.3 so far has had 3 service packs.

I know i'll quite happily shell out 129 bucks for 10.3, it's a hell of a lot cheeper than the 600 for windows XP.

If you want all your upgrades for free go and install linux or something, but then i guess people would be complaining about how it cost to download.

</rant-off>

[Adam Betts]

Originally posted by mark9939:
By the way, OSX piraters, please don't complain about Apple's products or prices, because you're not helping them at all by not purchasing the OS.

Damn right! Real owner have a right to complain because they purchased it, not people who warezed it.

[OwlBoy]

Originally posted by MickS:
Not quite free, you had to pay for shipping unless you could get to a dealer that had the free CDs. I think that the only reason for this was that the performance of 10.0 sucked so badly that Apple wanted to placate the people knocking it.

That said I would expect 10.3 to be a minimal charge update from Jag. If you want to upgrade from 10.0 or 10.1 it will be a full charge.

Same thing (not quite free) with 10.2.3 etc.

You can buy them online if you don't have the internet.

-Owl

[brainchild2b]

Am i missing something? Are people not budgeting in a couple hundred dollars a year for upgrades? $150 saved over the course of the year can't really be that bad if you plan to spend it in advance.

Start budgeting. 10.2 was worth every dime.

[Avon]

Why are people so cheap?

I have bought every system software update since 7.0. Every one of them. Its well worth the money. Especialy now with the $70 student price.

If you don't want to pay for software there are plenty of free operating systems that allow you to update every single day to the latest snapshot for free if you desire.

But in reality, the $100 you spend every year and a half or so is well worth it. I'ts dirt cheap when you look at how easy it is to upgrade and get on with your life.

To all thoes childish post about pirating apple software, shame on you.

[CheesePuff]

Originally posted by Adam Betts:
Damn right! Real owner have a right to complain because they purchased it, not people who warezed it.

But we will still hear Cipher13 complain that 10.3 isn't fast enough on his 3 year old machine.

[Cipher13]

Originally posted by SMacTech:
They will just ignore you, let alone perform something as absurd as you suggest.
Maybe in your dreams they will.

Wow. You need to work on your sarcasm-detector.

Anyway... they can ignore me all they like. Until they give me a decent product, they won't get anything out of me; nor out of the huge budget I command. We're migrating our work systems to OSX by next year. They'll be running 10.2, not 10.3, if we have to pay for the update. That is Apples loss - not ours.

Originally posted by godzookie2k:
Cipher and the rest of the non-paying crowd:

You are forgetting that apple owes you nothing, and you aren't bound by god to pick up and use X.3 either....get my point?

Absolutely, and you're correct. Doesn't this annoy you in the least, though?

Originally posted by diamondsw:
Troll.

This has been discussed to death,and to sum up - all the way back to 7.0, every other update is free. Just call Jaguar 10.5 instead and it all makes sense. Remember, Apple didn't decide what to number it until the end, and went with 10.2 only becuase they don't want their "X" message dilluted by hitting Mac OS X 11.0.

You think I'd shell out the cash if they slapped a new name on it? Maybe some people would - I, for one, most certainly would not.

Originally posted by mark9939:
If you don't like paying for the updates, then don't; go to Windows where you only have to pay for OS updates every couple years..... (you get service packs for free)

By the way, OSX piraters, please don't complain about Apple's products or prices, because you're not helping them at all by not purchasing the OS.

It's tempting, believe me.

As I said, I've paid for 10.0, and 10.2. I will continue to complain about whatever I see fit. Don't like it? Deal.

Originally posted by CheesePuff:
But we will still hear Cipher13 complain that 10.3 isn't fast enough on his 3 year old machine.

...and CheeseDick will continue to post insanely useless comments...

And yeah, you're damn right. 3 years and $4600 - my machine had better still be decent.

*

Apple is really pushing their luck here.

[JLL]

Originally posted by Cipher13:
We're migrating our work systems to OSX by next year. They'll be running 10.2, not 10.3, if we have to pay for the update. That is Apples loss - not ours.

And the smart thing would be to buy Mac OS X with maintenance.

[Angus_D]

Originally posted by Cipher13:
We're migrating our work systems to OSX by next year. They'll be running 10.2, not 10.3, if we have to pay for the update.

If you migrate them after 10.3 is released, you won't have to pay twice, unless you're planning on pirating a copy of 10.2 you already owned on a massive scale.

That is Apples loss - not ours.

How do you figure that one out?

[dfiler]

Originally posted by Angus_D:
If you migrate them after 10.3 is released, you won't have to pay twice, unless you're planning on pirating a copy of 10.2 you already owned on a massive scale.How do you figure that one out?

Uh, maybe they're migrating to the version of OS X that shipped with their machines but has remained unused?

Shouldn't we be evaluating upgrade charges based upon their suitability for Apple's niche in the market? If the prices are really too high, Apple will loose customers. Isn't capitalism great? This whole good vs evil thing makes for great flame wars though.

[Nebagakid]

Just imagine that the 10 is not there, because that does not really matter

It is really Mac OS X 0.0 that we originally got, followed by the free update of version 1.0, followed by a paid update of 2.0


WAIT!!! Jesus people, 18 months without having to pay for an update or a new feature. I have not bought anything (hardware wise) from Apple in the past 3 or 4 years, but they release some of the best freeware out there.... i am not trying to justify this..

But seriously, you pay to use the product, and if you use it, you should pay it. Apple makes a product, adds a price tag, and that is the fee if you want to use it,you see? Otherwise, you are stealing, and Apple needs to raise the price even further because of piracy

Now, come on, you have been using Mac OS X 2 for 18 months, and they ask for 129 bucks for the next version, you are gonna think you have not gotten your $129 out of the 10.2 to justify your purhcase of 10.3? Well, then, you obviously have not used it up to its potential..

[godzookie2k]

Originally posted by Cipher13:
Absolutely, and you're correct. Doesn't this annoy you in the least, though?

Not remotely. I go to the supermarket and purchase milk. If the milk is sour, yes I expect the supermarket to give me a new one, I don't expect free jugs of milk until *I* deem a jug of milk worth my purchasing it. A bit of a strech of a metaphor, but I think its self explanitory. I give apple money and purchase a product, as is, from them. I don't *expect* free upgrades unless the product is broken (read: OSX.0). The 10.x.x free upgrades are an added bonus. If I think 10.3's feature set and fixed bugs are worth purchasing I will pay, If not, I'll stay with 10.2 and won't upgrade until some mission critical application *needs* it.

[diamondsw]

Originally posted by Cipher13:
Absolutely, and you're correct. Doesn't this annoy you in the least, though?

You think I'd shell out the cash if they slapped a new name on it? Maybe some people would - I, for one, most certainly would not.

All the people here are saying is that the upgrade pricing makes perfect sense based on Apple's past history. Whether you want to buy it is your business.

Aladdin thinks Stuffit 7.0 is worth an upgrade fee. Connectix thinks VPC6 is worth it. I disagree, so I'll stay with the lower versions until I see something worth my money. Other people will want those upgrades and buy it. So the fact that you don't feel an upgrade is worth your money isn't exactly front-page news, and there's no reason your purchasing patterns affect the rest of us.

If a paid update isn't worth it to you, don't buy it - that's your choice. I personally found a lot to like in 10.2, and bought it. If you don't, fine.

Sheesh.

[booboo]

I'm anticipating spending the equivalent of around $3000 on a new PowerMac and screen. I also anticipate within 1 month and 1 day of that purchase, whatever that may be, Apple will release 10.3 available as a pay upgrade, or free to all who purchased 10.2 within the last 1 month.

I love Mac's, OS X, and covert iPods, but I'm no longer quite so keen on Apple.

Happy New Year!

[cowerd]

I'm anticipating spending the equivalent of around $3000 on a new PowerMac and screen. I also anticipate within 1 month and 1 day of that purchase, whatever that may be, Apple will release 10.3 available as a pay upgrade, or free to all who purchased 10.2 within the last 1 month.

Or you can check the Apple website or PR releases for the 10.3 pre-announcement, and be a smart consumer. Apple only pre-announced 10.2 by about 3 months, and that approximate ship date was followed with reams of other fairly accurate info from Apple-centric websites. Its one thing to be a non-webcentric Apple consumer, its another thing to post regularly on these boards and complain about getting shafted by Apple release dates.

Have a nice day!

[snerdini]

Now, come on, you have been using Mac OS X 2 for 18 months, and they ask for 129 bucks for the next version, you are gonna think you have not gotten your $129 out of the 10.2 to justify your purhcase of 10.3? Well, then, you obviously have not used it up to its potential.. [/B]

I agree. Do people think that software magically writes itself?

[passmaster16]

Originally posted by ngrundy:
sofar win2k has had 2 service packs.

Make that 3 service packs but i agree with you, people are getting caught up in the numbering scheme. The 10.x.x releases are similar to the service packs on Windows. I don't see what the big deal is. If you were running Win 2k and then wanted XP, you had to pay for the upgrade. And guess what? When Microsoft's next OS is released you'll have to pay for it too, regardless of if it is really 5.2 or whatever. This is no different from users running 10.1 and paying to upgrade to Jag. Maybe Apple should do like M$ and just name it completely different so people wouldn't complain. The point has already been made that they wanted to keep the 10 theme for a while. The problem is we like to compare numbers, and naturally we assume that an upgrade from 10.1 to 10.2 is marginal and therefore should be free. Like some others have already stated, don't base the upgrade on the numbering scheme rather than its content. Numerically, the upgrade from 10.1 to 10.2 is minimal but in terms of added features/improvements, many agree that 10.2 is substantial enough to warrant selling it. Of course, I think if what you have works for you, then don't bother to upgrade, and if you don't like paying for newer releases, then maybe linux is a consideration.

-Josh

[Mr Scruff]

Originally posted by Fdanna:
(we)Americans shouldn't say "wanker," "cheers," or any other British terms. It just sounds stupid with the wrong accent.

Needless to say, I'm not paying.

Do Americans not say 'Cheers'?

I thought you did...

[nforcer]

Originally posted by Cipher13:
This is stupid.

I don't care if Apple rewrite OSX in FORTAN just to impress us, there's no way in hell I'm paying for 10.3.

I paid for 10, I paied for 10.2, Apple can blow me if they don't think I'm pirating the next one.

Apple is a business, like any, that has to make money. They are free to dictate whatever they want to charge for something. Unlike with Microsoft, you are free to choose whether to purchase what you want to buy or not.

I say, look at the overall value of what they are selling you. Visit an Apple Store, or local Mac retailer, and try before you buy. 10.0 was a new, albeit very unfinished product. 10.1 was free, and basically corrected many of the downfalls of 10.0. 10.2 was not free, because it took longer to develop, and added a helluva lot more than 10.1 did.

If 10.3 (or whatever they call it) has features and fixes you want at a price you can afford, then buy it. If it doesn't have anything you want and costs money, then don't buy it. If you feel the pricing is too high, wait a while or shop around (10.2 was ~$75 last I checked with Macmall). Simple as that.

DON'T warez it. Warezing software, only helps to drive up prices for paying users such as myself, and like you, I don't like having to pay higher prices for things.

[Cipher13]

Originally posted by Angus_D:
If you migrate them after 10.3 is released, you won't have to pay twice, unless you're planning on pirating a copy of 10.2 you already owned on a massive scale.How do you figure that one out?

How will that help at all, when we have hundreds of copies of OSX 10.2 sitting there doing nothing? The copies that shipped with the machine? How will we not have to pay twice? We already have the machines.

It's Apple's loss because if we have to pay a full price for 10.3, well - they're losing out on about 150 sales... and that's just the initial migration.

If they released it with an upgrade price of like $20 or so, everybody would be happy, and Apple wouldn't be raping their customers quite so badly.

$270 AUD for 10.0... $270 for 10.2... $270 for 10.3... that's $810 AUD in operating system costs alone. Imagine my home situation, rather than work.

That's AUD$810 x 3 for each of the machines capable of running OSX. That's $2430. That's enough for another overpriced Apple laptop. Heh.

[mikerally]

Moose wrote:
We've seen only two updates thus far. One happened to be free, the other happened to be paid. This really isn't enough to establish a pattern. All you're doing is setting yourself up for disappointment should Apple decide to charge for 10.3.

Mac OS 8.0 Paid
Mac OS 8.1 Free Upgrade

Mac OS 8.5 Paid
Mac OS 8.6 Free Upgrade

Mac OS 9.0 Paid
Mac OS 9.1 Free Upgrade

Mac OS 10.0 Paid (with a free copy of 9.2 - which was never sold seperately BTW)
Mac OS 10.1 Free Upgrade

Now try telling me there isn't an established Pattern here (9.2 doesn't quite fit because it was released after 10.0 - and is free for both users of 9 and 10 and was never sold on it's own).

10.2 breaks the pattern here, I guess because Apple doesn't want to run out of numbers too quickly, but to tell people they're silly or stupid or whatever for following this pattern isn't nice - they have a valid point, even if they will be disappointed (and they find that they have to pay for it).

Of course Apple can choose to do what they wish, but if A) the upgrade doesn't seem that substantial or B) Apple charges full price too often for upgrades - then I think a lot more people will either stay with 10.2 or get a pirate copy because they don't need the features or they've spent what money they've had on previous upgrades.

So really Apple chooses this wisely. For 10.2 they were right - it was worth the upgrade price.