[Orion27]

I've read some unhappiness about the price
of the Panther upgrade. One "evangelist" thinks $129 is not customer friendly. Quote:
"....charging full price for an OS that was just an update, etc. I haven't heard of Microsoft charging $129 for an XP upgrade that is necessary to use a web browser, or bundling hotmail and charging $99 a year for it....." Does he have a point?

[-Q-]

Originally posted by Orion27:
Does he have a point?

No.

Panter includes over 100 new features as well as some bug fixes.

He may have had a point if he said the price point was unfriendly to upgrading customers but as it stands, he's just whining.

And again, Apple doesn't follow the old industry standard 'point release' format. Full system upgrades are in the 10.x format. Service releases (a.k.a. 'updates') are in the 10.x.x format. I imagine that was brought about by naming it 'Mac OS X' so they have to use '10' for as long as possible. And to do so, system upgrades are in this new aforementioned designation.

This discussion of whether or not there should be an upgrade price is another topic entirely.

[JLL]

Originally posted by Orion27:
I've read some unhappiness about the price
of the Panther upgrade. One "evangelist" thinks $129 is not customer friendly. Quote:
"....charging full price for an OS that was just an update, etc. I haven't heard of Microsoft charging $129 for an XP upgrade that is necessary to use a web browser, or bundling hotmail and charging $99 a year for it....." Does he have a point?

Well, XP is only a .1 update to Win2K

[suthercd]

When 10.2 Jaguar was released, the amount of change internally was huge. This went way way beyond the published enhancements. The underlying code reworking/improvement was system wide. Reading the Cocoa-dev list at Apple as well as MacTech and other journals gives insight into this. If that is an indicator, 10.3 will be more than a bug fix.

Craig

[mitchell_pgh]

I'm on the fence.

I DO NOT consider this an update. It would be more like moving from Windows 95 to Windows 98 as compared to 9.1 to 9.2. I'm not going to fall into the "It's only a dot one upgrade" mentality as there are some very attractive features.

$129 is expensive in my opinion (especially after purchasing a G4 3 months before Jaguar was released. I was happy to throw down $129 for that upgrade, but it's starting to become a little expensive for my "average joe" tastes...

If it's $129, I'll buy it. I won't like it, but I'll buy it. The user switching is reason enough for me (my girlfriend and I use the same computer and I want her crap in it's own place.

iChat AV is cool, but not reason enough to pay that much.

The speed will be worth it...

I think of it as how much would I be willing to pay for the pieces.

iChat AV - $0
User Switching - $20
New/Upgraded Mail - $10
Speed - $20
Expos� - Haven't used, but I'm guessing $5
FileVault - $5
Font Book - $10
Built-in Faxing - $5
Xcode - $0
Labels - Haven't used, but I'm guessing $5
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Total $80 (not including all of the other little tweaks and upgrades)

But then again, I'm cheap. Like I said, as long as it's $129 or under, I'm buying it.

[osxisfun]

To me expose is worth $130 by itself. I really think people are underestimated the impact it will have on them.

Its probably the best GUI interface tweak since multifinder. (1985?)

[KidRed]

Sorry, Jag was more of an update then Panther. New finder, new apps, major speed improvements, new features (100). That's more then VPC6, PS7 gave and they change a lot more then $129 to upgrade.

Some people just whine about any and everything.

[Alex00087]

Well im sure that some online retailer will have it for less than $129, like last year Amazon had that rebate for Jaguar making it come out to only $80? I'm not sure exactly how much it was but I think it was around there.

[SomeToast]

Originally posted by mitchell_pgh:
Total $80 (not including all of the other little tweaks and upgrades)

Don't forget $30 for the improved open/save dialogs ($15 alone for being able to copy names in save dialogs to the filename field by clicking an existing file on the list)!

[::maroma::]

Here we go again. Another year, another update, another batch of whiners. All these threads are really pointless. There's one extremely simple rule to follow, if you're capable of comprehending it:

If you don't think Panther is worth what Apple charges for it, don't buy it.

Nothing, and I mean nothing, speaks louder to a company than the almighty dollar. Stop posting threads on Mac discussion boards about how you are unhappy with the price. I have news for you, NO ONE HERE CAN DO ANYTHING ABOUT THE PRICE.

Of course, if you just want to whine to whine, well I guess it's a free internet.

[Alex Duffield]

Originally posted by osxisfun:
To me expose is worth $130 by itself. I really think people are underestimated the impact it will have on them.

Its probably the best GUI interface tweak since multifinder. (1985?)

I second that!!

I used Panther on my system (from an external drive) for 3 days and It took me a full week to stop going to my "F" keys to change windows when I was back in Jaguar.

I think after a month with Expose people are going to wonder how they managed at all without it...

[cpac]

Originally posted by SomeToast:
Don't forget $30 for the improved open/save dialogs ($15 alone for being able to copy names in save dialogs to the filename field by clicking an existing file on the list)!

Yep.

And how 'bout browsing windows shares AND PRINTERS from the finder/printer set up dialog?

That's like getting the cost of DAVE for free...

[thefamousmred]

postcount++;

Panther is a new operating system. It happens to be compatible with your existing operating system (Jaguar). Your existing operating system will continue to function if you don't upgrade.

Since Panther is a new operating system, it will cost money. This is not out of the ordinary; many other new things in life cost money as well, such as cars and food.

::maroma:: has an excellent point: don't buy it if you don't want to! If you truly needed the product, you wouldn't be asking the question in the first place; you'd just pay for it, and that would be that.

Now someone please lock this thread, and all the rest like it. And if there's a way to preemptively lock new threads whining about why new things in life cost money, let's enable that feature.

[Simon X]

Originally posted by -Q-:
Panter includes over 100 new features as well as some bug fixes.

Whilst I agree that 100 new features deserve an upgrade fee, I don't bother to bitch and moan since I know I'll be first in the queue with my cash at the ready for Panther. But surely bug fixes shouldn't be part of your argument for paying the few?!

[mitchell_pgh]

Originally posted by ::maroma:::
Here we go again. Another year, another update, another batch of whiners. All these threads are really pointless. There's one extremely simple rule to follow, if you're capable of comprehending it:

If you don't think Panther is worth what Apple charges for it, don't buy it.

Nothing, and I mean nothing, speaks louder to a company than the almighty dollar. Stop posting threads on Mac discussion boards about how you are unhappy with the price. I have news for you, NO ONE HERE CAN DO ANYTHING ABOUT THE PRICE.

Of course, if you just want to whine to whine, well I guess it's a free internet.

Why shouldn't people complain about paying for this upgrade? (We are starting to look like windows with regards to their update schedule) This is a message board isn't it? I have also heard very little complaining (other then the "Oh, here we go again" group.

Call me a tight ass, but I like money, and I don't like blowing 129 bones on something that isn't worth it. That being said, I think Panther will be worth a $129 price tag.

[Orion27]

The reason I started this thread was to get other informed opinions on the upgrade. I've played with Panther enough to know I want in and the price we eventually pay hopefully funds X's continuing evolution. That's not to say I'd not bite at an Apple offer to purchase at a discount. Hey Steve, what are these coupons for that I got with my new dual 1.25 FW 800? A dicounted copy of OS 9? Well I could alway use it on my old iMac if I can't use it on my new box! No bitch here, really.
Just taunting the "evangelist", excuse me, "journalist".

[::maroma::]

Originally posted by mitchell_pgh:
Why shouldn't people complain about paying for this upgrade? (We are starting to look like windows with regards to their update schedule) This is a message board isn't it? I have also heard very little complaining (other then the "Oh, here we go again" group.

Call me a tight ass, but I like money, and I don't like blowing 129 bones on something that isn't worth it. That being said, I think Panther will be worth a $129 price tag.

No one is saying that you can't complain. I'm just saying that it is absolutely pointless to complain about such an issue on a message board!! How hard is this to comprehend? Do you think Steve himself browses this board and says, "Hm, looks like there's some people who aren't happy with the price of Panther. I guess I'll have to lower that."? If you must complain about APPLE'S pricing, go on APPLE'S message board and do so. Maybe, just maybe, someone there who has any authority to do anything about it might listen. But don't hold your breath.

And yes, there has been little complaining as of yet, but it will come. Believe you me, it will come. As Panther comes closer to release, the whining crew will all dust off their hankies for a good month or two of flooding this board with pointless treads.

And you can call me a whiner for whining about whiners, but come on. I have yet to hear a solid argument for the validity of these complaints.

I tell you what, why don't you tell me what good it does to post complaints about Apple's pricing on MacNN.com forums. If you can give me a good enough reason, I'll concede.

[tdvorak]

No he doesn't have a valid point. I welcome the over 100 features and am glad to pay 100-150 for the upgrade.

[osxisfun]

if apple played like Microsoft then this would be called 10.5 and no one would be complaining about the price.

instead its the .1 people to seem to be having a cow over. think of it in that light. or not. or if you think pnather is not worth $130 then don't buy or wait till it drops.

[JLL]

Originally posted by osxisfun:
if apple played like Microsoft then this would be called 10.5 and no one would be complaining about the price.

Um, Win98, 98SE and ME were .1 updates if you look at their version numbers, and XP is a .1 update to Win2K.

If Apple were like Microsoft they would've called it .Mac OS 2003 v. XP

[JLL]

Originally posted by mitchell_pgh:
Why shouldn't people complain about paying for this upgrade?

Because it's the same every time. In about a year we'll have the same kind of threads about 10.4.

Originally posted by mitchell_pgh:
(We are starting to look like windows with regards to their update schedule)

?? There are 2-3 years between Windows updates and we've had major Mac OS updates every year since Mac OS 8.0.

[mfethers]

Originally posted by JLL:

?? There are 2-3 years between Windows updates and we've had major Mac OS updates every year since Mac OS 8.0.

And as far as I'm concerned, each one of them has been worth the cost. You're actually complaining that the Mac OS has been progressing too quickly. Would you rather have paid less but be at, what, 8.6?

We're all laughing at the 2-3 year extension of Longhorn, but we don't want to pay for something that - by all accounts - seems to be light years ahead of Jaguar and XP.

Sometimes I wonder why I obsessively continue to read these threads....

[JLL]

Originally posted by mfethers:
And as far as I'm concerned, each one of them has been worth the cost. You're actually complaining that the Mac OS has been progressing too quickly. Would you rather have paid less but be at, what, 8.6?

I don't know if you're addressing me or the others 'cause I'm not complaining

Originally posted by mfethers:
We're all laughing at the 2-3 year extension of Longhorn, but we don't want to pay for something that - by all accounts - seems to be light years ahead of Jaguar and XP.

What laughable is Software Assurance. Companies that have SA on XP will have to pay for two periods to get Longhorn - that's an expensive upgrade.

Apple's Maintenance Program at least saves you a lot of money.

[mfethers]

Originally posted by JLL:
I don't know if you're addressing me or the others 'cause I'm not complaining

Sorry, misunderstood your post! Just shouting at the sky out of frustration.

Bottom line: if it's worth it for you, fork it over, if it's not, don't. If no one buys Pather, they will lower the price. But don't expect Apple to be a charitable organization.

[mrmister]

Well, I believe people need to stop freaking out that people are complaining about the price. Defend the platform, defend the OS, whatever--don't try to stifle complaining. Address it.

I'm on the fence on Panther. I'll be getting it, as I am inveterately up-to-date, but after using the DP for a few weeks I am a little underwhelmed. It does have some killer moments (Expose, overall speed) but a lot of the changes are evolutionary, rather than revolutionary. That's to be expected at this point for OSX, but it makes a $129 price tag one year after a similar price tag hard to swallow. It feels like a $69 update--at that price I think everyone would be very satisfied.

I do know that I will be leaving a lot of the computers I regularly maintain on Jaguar until after Panther has been out of the gate a bit, as I find Jaguar very stable and mature.

[I Have Questions]

Well, I'm counting on "X for Teachers" to come around again so my wife can get it for free.

[::maroma::]

Originally posted by mrmister:
Well, I believe people need to stop freaking out that people are complaining about the price. Defend the platform, defend the OS, whatever--don't try to stifle complaining. Address it.

That is my point, we can't address it. What are we to do? All we can do is say "Yeah!" or "No!". That is hardly addressing the problem. The only ones who can address the pricing issue is Apple. Period.

[aehaas]

Smart people learn from their mistakes.

Really smart people learn from other people's mistakes.

aehaas

[wallinbl]

Originally posted by JLL:
?? There are 2-3 years between Windows updates and we've had major Mac OS updates every year since Mac OS 8.0.

That just means you pay 2-3 times as much to keep up with the latest version of the OS.

[osxisfun]

Actually it means you can CHOOSE (or choose not) to purchase 2-3 times as much.

[brachiator]

Originally posted by ::maroma:::
That is my point, we can't address it. What are we to do? All we can do is say "Yeah!" or "No!". That is hardly addressing the problem. The only ones who can address the pricing issue is Apple. Period.

maroma, we are addressing it by complaining -- Apple doesn't make the market. We customers do, and Apple responds (or doesn't). Right now, at least, the market is sufficiently satisfied with the price, and Apple is satisfied that it won't get enough additional share by lowering the price.

But given that, if people not only didn't buy the upgrade, but complained to Apple about it as well, then Apple would have more info on which to assess the share it is losing due to the price. Additionally, though, the complaining here has the potential to affect the price, because it might stir up both additional resistance to buying at the $129 price, and additional complaints to Apple.

I'll resist the temptation to cover my ass by noting whether I will buy Panther at the $129 price. I'll say only that in the full scope of the PC market, Apple is a brand for the relatively well-off (versus, say, the 500 buck entry level Dell/Windoze machine). That's Apple's choice to limit its market and user base, so I tend to agree that there won't be a price change, because Apple doesn't care to attract the poorer end of the market (except the temporary low-end of students and educators... to a limited degree).

Well, this post is about worth as much as the others in this thread, I reckon.

[hmurchison2001]

All the complaining in the world isn't going to change Apples structure.

OSX upgrades come once a year. These upgrades are $129. Some features will appeal to some users some will not. Threads like these ARE pointless because I may LOVE Expose and find it has tangible value while others may not. We agree to disagree however my value proposition for Panther changes versus yours. So you may complain ...but I am not.

I look at OSX and I think things like the iapps are very nice and frankly are included within the OS generally. However that's the problem with giving things free to consumers. They tend to "consume" and then ask for more. Apple has bills to and employees to pay. I'm willing to help them as long as they help me.

[thefamousmred]

Panther isn't an upgrade. It is a new operating system that happens to be backwards compatible (in most cases) with previous operating systems.

It is a completely new product in the same way that a 2004 Honda Accord is different than a 2003 Honda Accord. If you own a 2003, you wouldn't complain that Honda charged you for "upgrading" to a 2004, would you? Of course not. So why all the whining?

The only difference between a car upgrade and a upgrade is in your head.

[krove]

Originally posted by brachiator:
maroma, we are addressing it by complaining -- Apple doesn't make the market. We customers do, and Apple responds (or doesn't). Right now, at least, the market is sufficiently satisfied with the price, and Apple is satisfied that it won't get enough additional share by lowering the price.

But given that, if people not only didn't buy the upgrade, but complained to Apple about it as well, then Apple would have more info on which to assess the share it is losing due to the price. Additionally, though, the complaining here has the potential to affect the price, because it might stir up both additional resistance to buying at the $129 price, and additional complaints to Apple.

If such were the case, wouldn't we have seen cheaper machines years ago? Apple operates a high-end, niche market, where prices are actually expected to be higher. People don't like paying a small amount for high-end products; they actually expect to pay more. They don't like it, but that's the mentality of a consumer.

For example, $20000 for a brand new BMW. Must be too good to be true, there must be something wrong with it as opposed to paying $40000+.

As a player that aims to differentiate its products as higher-end gear, Apple can actually get the market to accept its higher prices. It's called monopolistic competition. The market is competitive, but by differentiating its products, it can sell them at higher prices than the rest of the markets players (Dell, HP, Gateway) who try to differentiate, but don't perform as well as Apple. As such, the rest of the players in the market are more competitive, leading to lower prices. Apple is similar to Nike in that product differentiation has allowed them to sell products at higher prices than the rest of their respective markets.

Apple will always choose to differentiate itself from the rest of the market, as that is exactly what has allowed them to survive. With that said, their prices will always be high ($150 for an iSight, $129 OS upgrades, etc).

[/econ 101 lesson]

[brachiator]

I don't disagree. Although I do think that Apple should simply lower its prices to approximately 97% of its production cost. It would make up the profit on the increased volume of sales.

Originally posted by krove:
If such were the case, wouldn't we have seen cheaper machines years ago? Apple operates a high-end, niche market, where prices are actually expected to be higher. People don't like paying a small amount for high-end products; they actually expect to pay more. They don't like it, but that's the mentality of a consumer.

For example, $20000 for a brand new BMW. Must be too good to be true, there must be something wrong with it as opposed to paying $40000+.

As a player that aims to differentiate its products as higher-end gear, Apple can actually get the market to accept its higher prices. It's called monopolistic competition. The market is competitive, but by differentiating its products, it can sell them at higher prices than the rest of the markets players (Dell, HP, Gateway) who try to differentiate, but don't perform as well as Apple. As such, the rest of the players in the market are more competitive, leading to lower prices. Apple is similar to Nike in that product differentiation has allowed them to sell products at higher prices than the rest of their respective markets.

Apple will always choose to differentiate itself from the rest of the market, as that is exactly what has allowed them to survive. With that said, their prices will always be high ($150 for an iSight, $129 OS upgrades, etc).

[/econ 101 lesson]

[clebin]

I think $129 (or �99) is too expensive.

Apple have an extra revenue stream with .Mac and they need to re-examine their upgrade policy in the light of it. If they think that paying a yearly .Mac and buying a yearly MacOS upgrade doesn't change the public's attitude towards their prices, they're being naive.

While OS features depend on .Mac and .Mac features depend on the OS version, they can't pretend that they are merely different products. At the least, they should offer a special deal for .Mac subscribers and/or upgraders. It's in their interest to do this. They want to users on the newest Mac OS and subscribing to .Mac.

There are features worth paying for in Panther. Expos� is truly great for anyone who seriously works on a Mac. Fast user switching is also excellent. But there's not much else in this release that screams out at you. Apple are still fixing the Finder rather than turning it into an incredible modern and innovative tool. Even now, there's still plenty that needs fixing!

For another thing, the label implementation is more basic than the one Apple had in System 7 - you can't add colours or apply names to labels and the icons don't get shaded. Even if they add these things by launch, it's an old old feature.

But featureset might be a different argument. First and foremost they need to encourage people to stay loyal, keep up to date and use .Mac.

[mrtew]

Originally posted by ::maroma:::
If you don't think Panther is worth what Apple charges for it, don't buy it.[/B]

I don't think Jaguar is worth it. I thought it did until someone asked me what it had that 10.1 didn't. I was speechless. I said it's a little faster and it has spring loaded folders. And then I ran out of great new things that made it worth $130. Based on that experience I don't think Panther will be worth it either. And I don't want to pay for it. But I will because I always want the newest thing. But I will be resentful. So all I can really do is complain.

And I will worry about Apple's customer base that is becoming more and more fractured by their pricing strategy. I really can't see most people paying for upgrades and I've heard that most don't. Is it really worth charging money for upgrades that most people don't buy? I think they should go back to offering the operating system for free to keep everyone on the same page and making money on the computers. I think of all the people that still use 10.1 and wonder if they will upgrade to windows machines instead of Apples because their computers run so darned slow. Apple should concentrate on keeping customers happy, not trying to bleed them for a bill and a half every year. I guess they must know best, but I am resentful.

[:XI:]

Originally posted by Orion27:
I've read some unhappiness about the price
of the Panther upgrade. One "evangelist" thinks $129 is not customer friendly. Quote:
"....charging full price for an OS that was just an update, etc. I haven't heard of Microsoft charging $129 for an XP upgrade that is necessary to use a web browser, or bundling hotmail and charging $99 a year for it....." Does he have a point?

Is this guy attacking the Panther price or .macs price? Both?

Panther isn't 'just' an upgrade. It's a whole OS. You don't buy upgrades, you buy a new OS. I like this method. I bought my mac with 10.1, I bought 10.2 and updated the install. When I buy 10.3 I will again update the install. Should anything bad happen to my computer the requires an OS re-install would I prefer to install 10.1, update to 10.2 then update to 10.3 or just install 10.3? Yep. You guessed it. Install 10.3. So for $129 (or the �99 I will pay) I get a little convenience for my extra money. Money that a year down the line, I won't even have missed. It's not like I'm still making payments for 10.2 is it?

"I haven't heard of Microsoft charging $129 for an XP upgrade that is necessary to use a web browser."
But aren't they ending IE as a stand alone app? So, you'll have to buy the next version of Windows to use the next version of IE? 'Evangelist'? yeah, right.
Should Apple (and us, the users) complain that we can't use iPhoto in OS9? What about Maya for Windows, that won't run on 95. Same for XSI. Should we complain to A|W and Softimage and get them to change that? Why won't the latest versions of Lightwave run on my Amiga (the platform it started on)?
It's called progress.

Also .mac is optional. If you don't need it. Don't buy it.

Just checking amazon.com

WinXP Home is $182.99 for the full version and $86.99 for the upgrade.
WinXP Pro is $272.99 for the full version and $169.99 for the upgrade.

Does $129 still look expensive? OK so you only have to pay MS every three years. But you're stuck with the SAME OS for those three years. For an extra $115 you get a new OS every year for the three years, fast security fixes and regular updates.

I'm not leaving the Mac anytime soon.

[osxisfun]

i think panther is a steal at $130.

[mrmister]

I feel the opposite--Panther doesn't do enough to justify its price, especially one year after a similar OS release.

"Panther isn't an upgrade. It is a new operating system that happens to be backwards compatible (in most cases) with previous operating systems."

It doesn't make it all that more palatable to know this semantic point.

I just think that at a release a year, at these prices, Apple is walking a dangerous line. 10.1 was free because 10.0 sucked, 10.2 was paid and I felt it was a bargain at the price...but I'm underwhelmed by 10.3. I hpe it is not the beginning of a trend.

[m@]

I will pay for 10.3 because the primary application of Mac OS X, the Finder, should for the first time in OS X history work the way it should. That is, transparently with the user not working around the bugs.

As long as Apple irons out all the bugs and makes a fast, optimised rock-solid OS I don't mind too much about radical revolutionary innovation (well not too much!). Apple is slowly iterating it's OS to a point where it has all the advantages of Mac AND Unix, like it claimed originally at X's launch. They are still getting there, and well be for some time.

This said, Apple does need to throw it's loyal users a bone every now and again. This is what Exposé, fancy user switching and iChat AV are in my opinion.

For a Finder that works, and faster performance on my ageing 500 MHz PBG4 this is still cheaper than a new computer!

[BZ]

This is what I posted on 8/14/2002 and it still holds true...

"I have only tried 10.2 on a 17" iMac at MWNY02, so I am not saying I have spent that much time on it but here are a few thoughts.

Should the price be lower? Sure. I always like something for nothing but I also want Apple to survive. I own two Macs and much Apple stock so if the business decision is to ask $129, well, it is up to the consumer to decide. I will buy it. I have friends and parents who will be getting it as a free upgrade (they just bought macs) but I will buy it anyway. The list of features is great from the unix stuff (which I love) to the new apps (iSync, iCal). I have heard anything between 10-25% speed increases across the board. Would you buy a "chip" for your computer that gave you 10-25% speed increase? Damn right you would.

The other thing I find interesting is some of the penny pinching going on. I am not floating in money but I try to do a value equation when I am thinking about buying something. I bought 10.0 on 3/24/01 for full price. I have used it for a year and a half for thousands of hours. Was it worth the $129? You bet.

Now I am looking at another $129 (I will probably get it from an Apple store, Soho). Given Apple's timing it should last me for a year or a year and a half more. So I get over 10 iApplications (iMovie, iDvd, iSync, Mail, iCal, iPhoto, Address book, iTunes, Preview, Sherlock.. etc etc), a whole new OS and a 10-25% speed increase, a year of automated updates for a year for only $129!?! I will use it for another two thousand hours (did the math) it will cost me about $.06 an hour. What is a movie here in NYC? $10 for 90 minutes or $6.50 an hour. How about cable ($45 a month)? or your internet connection ($50 a month)?

The good news is, you can wait. If you wait for 6 months or so, you will be able to get it for $45 at that point I doubt anyone will be able to argue it is too much."

And now to add to the 10.3 discussion...

With 10.2 we got a ton of new features and I was happy to pay for it.

With 10.3 we will get a ton more new features and I will be happy to pay for it.

I use the OS ALL THE TIME. It is always there, working doing stuff. I use the finder, Mail, iDisk, system prefences and everything else 100% of my computing time.

I pay for software I use and I use the OS so much it is worth paying for it every year. Hell, Quicken comes out once a year at $49-$59 and I always buy it as well and I use it 1/20th of the time I use the OS.

BZ

[clebin]

Why do people keep saying Panther is a totally new OS? It doesn't make any sense!

There are times when people sit down and rewrite their software from scratch, but in general 2.0 is an update to 1.0, and 10.3 is an update to 10.2.

The poster above, and others are saying "I use it all the time, so it's great value for me!" Well, we're not exactly your average users are we? Posting on Mac forums is not what most people do when they have a spare minute.

So it's not too difficult to believe that they might be a little miffed to pay �100 for an OS update (or is it an entirely rewritten brand-new I-can't-believe-it's-the-same-computer OS?) alongside their .Mac subscription just a short time after getting 10.2. It's not too difficult to believe they'll just stick with the version they have now, which is a big loss to Apple if you ask me.

[thefamousmred]

Originally posted by clebin:
Why do people keep saying Panther is a totally new OS? It doesn't make any sense!

There are times when people sit down and rewrite their software from scratch, but in general 2.0 is an update to 1.0, and 10.3 is an update to 10.2.

Well, by that logic......Panther is a new OS! OS X is built on top of a BSD-like OS called Darwin. Darwin is currently at v6.6, which is what's used in 10.2.6. Panther/10.3 will use Darwin 7.0. So you see, 7.0 (Panther) is an update to 6.0 (Jaguar). Does it make more sense now?

Furthermore (as others have pointed out) "OS X" is a brand name now, in the same way that "Windows" is. Making the next release "OS XI" or "OS X 11.0" wouldn't make a whole lot of sense now, would it? That's why Apple sticks with the 10.x naming convention, which means no 11.0 for awhile.

[lookmark]

Originally posted by mrmister:
I just think that at a release a year, at these prices, Apple is walking a dangerous line. 10.1 was free because 10.0 sucked, 10.2 was paid and I felt it was a bargain at the price...but I'm underwhelmed by 10.3. I hpe it is not the beginning of a trend.

It sure is the beginning of a trend.

A well-above-minor but just-short-of-major OS upgrade at the end of each year, for $129.

Panther looks *great*, for all the reasons shown in Apple's preview -- and many more not publically shown -- but this year I'm glad I'll be paying the education price.

[JLL]

Originally posted by lookmark:
It sure is the beginning of a trend.

Beginning? They've done it since Mac OS 8.0.

[typoon]

Originally posted by :XI::
Is this guy attacking the Panther price or .macs price? Both?

Panther isn't 'just' an upgrade. It's a whole OS. You don't buy upgrades, you buy a new OS. I like this method. I bought my mac with 10.1, I bought 10.2 and updated the install. When I buy 10.3 I will again update the install. Should anything bad happen to my computer the requires an OS re-install would I prefer to install 10.1, update to 10.2 then update to 10.3 or just install 10.3? Yep. You guessed it. Install 10.3. So for $129 (or the �99 I will pay) I get a little convenience for my extra money. Money that a year down the line, I won't even have missed. It's not like I'm still making payments for 10.2 is it?

"I haven't heard of Microsoft charging $129 for an XP upgrade that is necessary to use a web browser."
But aren't they ending IE as a stand alone app? So, you'll have to buy the next version of Windows to use the next version of IE? 'Evangelist'? yeah, right.
Should Apple (and us, the users) complain that we can't use iPhoto in OS9? What about Maya for Windows, that won't run on 95. Same for XSI. Should we complain to A|W and Softimage and get them to change that? Why won't the latest versions of Lightwave run on my Amiga (the platform it started on)?
It's called progress.

Also .mac is optional. If you don't need it. Don't buy it.

Just checking amazon.com

WinXP Home is $182.99 for the full version and $86.99 for the upgrade.
WinXP Pro is $272.99 for the full version and $169.99 for the upgrade.

Does $129 still look expensive? OK so you only have to pay MS every three years. But you're stuck with the SAME OS for those three years. For an extra $115 you get a new OS every year for the three years, fast security fixes and regular updates.

I'm not leaving the Mac anytime soon.

You forgot one thing. MS upgrades are just that, upgrades. You have to install the previous version of the OS before installing the upgrade. EVERY Apple upgrade has been a FULL system install so when I reformat my drive I don't have to install OS whatever before installing this new version/upgrade. I've played with Panther a little on my machine, what what I have seen it WILL be worth the 129 I plan to shell out for it.

[JLFanboy]

Let's hear it for educational pricing!

[:XI:]

Originally posted by typoon:
You forgot one thing. MS upgrades are just that, upgrades. You have to install the previous version of the OS before installing the upgrade. EVERY Apple upgrade has been a FULL system install so when I reformat my drive I don't have to install OS whatever before installing this new version/upgrade. I've played with Panther a little on my machine, what what I have seen it WILL be worth the 129 I plan to shell out for it.

Re-read the second paragraph in my post

Also, Jag came with iMovie, iTunes and iPhoto. I'm guessing Panther may come with iLife. It does have iChat AV included too.

[Telusman]

Well, from a Canadian perspective, we pay $199.99 for the upgrades, which is a bit expensive for my tastes. Sure Jaguar had 100 new features, and Panther is said to have 100 new features but I for one don't use half of them. Some "features" are totally useless. Expose is cool, but it's just eye candy, it really is, it's really not that special. (Kept me amused for about ... 20 minutes...) I think you're over estimating the impact it will have on them.

And paying $199.99 for a brushed metal Finder that makes me cringgeeeeee everytime i look at it, or the implied speed increases that will slow down just like Jaguar did after a few weeks of use. I have played with Panther, and knowing full well its beta software, I was unimpressed, I should hope it gets much faster when it's "release" quality.

When it comes to the features that the average joe uses, I do consider these upgrades dot upgrades in a lot of ways. Functionality is implied, but rarely used. I hope that upgrades become as appealing as they did for 10.2, I don't consider 10.3 with it's current featureset to be a milestone release.

Can't wait to be excited to upgrade again...

-Telusman

"Pirating Mac OS X's since Developer Preview 4"

Originally posted by osxisfun:
To me expose is worth $130 by itself. I really think people are underestimated the impact it will have on them.

Its probably the best GUI interface tweak since multifinder. (1985?)