Posted on 07/01/2009 2:14:14 PM PDT by Blue Highway
It seems like every time I venture into an Apple thread here on FR, it's similar to venturing over into Democratic Underground territory.
Personal attacks abound especially if you start criticizing Apple products or other Apple users for being naive into thinking Apple is everything their clever marketing department represents it to be.
It seems like the Mac ping list alerts the faithful flock to defend Apple to the death and that is when the claws come out and it starts to get ugly.
Thanks for your appreciation. In a way, we should also thank Blue Highway and Sudetenland for their axe grinding. If it weren't for them grinding away at stuff they know nothing about, I would not have been able to present the facts in an attempt to educate them. At least casual reader will learn the truth instead of the FUD they were spreading.
I do have one observation to add to the debate: my reading tells me that Win7 will not be totally backwards-compatible and will require some legacy software to run in some kind of virtual environment. I don't see that as a bad move by Microsoft. However, having to run legacy software in a virtual environment anyway, it seems this decision will permit MS users to consider virtualization under other operating systems that might suit their need. Virtualization under MacOSX certainly works for me.
Microsoft should have bitten the bullet long ago and put their legacy software compatibility into a virtual machine environment and modernized Windows. Apple did it with OSX. It worked for them and it worked for their developers who were given the opportunity to continue what they had already published while working with an OS that was already in the Wild, developing the next generation of their product. In the MS world, there are still vertical solution specialty apps that run in DOS and their publishers have not made much effort to bring them into compliance with Windows' User Interface.
Again, thanks for the thanks. It is sometimes difficult to keep up the effort in the face of the constant disparagement such as I've been receiving on this thread.
I Windows user running XP now will be able to get their upgrade for $50 as a pre-order now. XP to Windows 7 as an upgrade. No step to having to upgrade to Vista first. Why wouldn’t Apple offer an upgrade to Tiger users. Instant upgrade from Tiger to Snow Leopard would be a show of good will to their user base. I know you will rehash about how relevant Mac users already upgraded to Leopard a long time ago. Wouldn’t you think Apple users would want to get Tiger users on board? The $169 package smacks of greed to me especially since it isn’t an upgrade as it is just a discount for current Apple users to buy a full install of SNow Leopard for less than retail.
Apple’s $29 pricing decision is a clever one. They’re counting on gullible reporters and analysts to make oversimplified comparisons with Windows 7, and they’re hoping to goad Ballmer and Company into reacting with a slashed price of their own. If Microsoft is smart, they won’t take the bait.
I think Ed Bott summed up his article well with these last 2 paragraphs. I happen to agree with him and don't see how you can spin it any other way Swordmaker. Knowing you though, you can't help it and you will try to spin it anyways.
They are. Just not for $29. This way they are doing it also brings the other applications up to date as well, at a discount. Again, why does this bother you?
That's because you and Bott both have ADS. Why would Apple want MS to cut prices? Higher prices for Windows upgrades would be better for OSX sales as people compare.
We both know WHY they won't do that as it doesn't sound like an attractive price to draw in customers. Announcing $29 does wonders to make people THINK they are getting a deal. You don't think Apple's marketing department are using psychology to get new customers by using shady tactics like this?
Windows XP upgrade to Windows 7 = $50.00
Apple OSX 10.4 Tiger upgrade to OSX 10.6 Snow Leopard = $169.00
Windows Vista upgrade to Windows 7 = $0.00
Apple OSX 10.5 Leopard upgrade to OSX 10.6 Snow Leopard = $9.95
I’m confused, am I getting a deal since I, along with the vast majority of Mac owners, already have Leopard?
Care to take a guess on the percentage of people still running XP compared to still running Tiger on their Intel Macs?
Does $169 really not seem like a decent price for what you get? iLife and iWork are both $79 dollars sets if you buy them separately.
Thanks for the article Sudetenland. $29 for an upgrade “sounds” like a good deal till you read the fine print. Again, this is the kind of sneaky behavior where it seems Apple it trying to hoodwink it’s own users.Windows 7 versus Snow Leopard: How much do upgrades really cost? 421 posted on 07/04/2009 5:06:28 PM PDT by Sudetenland
I thought it was patent in their announcement that you get Snow Leopard for $29 only if you already have Leopard - and that Snow Leopard announces the phaseout of support for the PowerPC. I would be seriously disappointed if I were the last guy to by a PowerPC Mac. But Apple had to drop the PowerPC because the imposture that the "industry standard" Intel wasn't good enough for Apple just became absurd.Jobs came back to Apple and he cleared the decks by transitioning the Apple platform to Unix (which Jobs was committed to at the time he initially left Apple) and by abandoning Apple's quixotic aversion to Intel. At this point you have two competing software platforms, both running on similar hardware. You buy "Wintel" and you get backwards compatibility to old PC aps - and a history of egregious vulnerability to relatively crude hacks. You buy "Mactel" and you get compatibility with Unix apps (I claim no expertise other than that OS X has a Unix certificate Leopard gets UNIX 03 certification), and you get a history of no viruses in the wild. You still have to have your wits about you if someone targets a phishing attack at you - but the lack of a credible virus threat makes you less vulnerable to phishing attacks which exploit paranoia about viruses.
But it cost something to get to this place - it cost the burning of bridges behind, which means customers who bought products which became obsolescent rather quickly. But it is not clear that there are any more of those bullets to have to bite, unless it is the 4GB barrier. It appears that Snow Leopard is the road map forward, and the one thing that figures to threaten the modernity of recently purchased Macs it the likely development of software which wants more than 4GB of RAM. But I assume that 4GB-limited hardware will be quite useful for some years to come.
There undoubtedly are still a lot more XP users than there are Tiger users. Not sure what your point is. Ed Bott was just stating PowerPC (or any non-Intel (proprietary)) users were going to be orphaned needing to buy a new Mac. Also stating the cost from Tiger to Snow Leopard isn't a great deal.
$169 isn't that bad especially in essence skipping a generation of an OS in between. My only gripe is the misleading nature of Apple parading this $29 figure and simultaneously burying the $169 cost.
My point is there are a lot more people likely skipping Vista and going to Windows 7 from XP than there are going to be people who will have to skip Leopard. Most have likely already upgraded. I wasn’t comparing pure numbers, but percentage of users of the platform.
It isn’t all that misleading. They have always said $29 to upgrade from Leopard. It has never been stated that it is the same from Tiger.
At some point Apple was going to have to drop PPC support. Now seems like as good a time as any.
The next version is $29 if you have the current version. This is not rocket science, and it’s not “fine print” — it’s what Apple announced.
Apple OSX 10.4 Tiger upgrade to OSX 10.6 Snow Leopard = $169.00
That $169 also includes the current version of iLife and iWork. How much for Windows 7 plus a full install of the latest version of Office plus the Windows equivalents of iPhoto and iMovie, assuming equivalents exist?
To be honest I could care less...
You aren't being honest. Every time and everything you post on here shows that you have an agenda. That is caring, in some twisted, ADS way.
ZDNets article which clearly stated the case that Apple was promoting this $29 upgrade . . . Don't you find this kind of the way a used car salesman tries to scam customers with a low introductory price and then adds all these bogus charges?
And it IS a $29 upgrade to anyone who owns a computer with Leopard factory installed or who has already purchased Leopard as an upgrade. IT IS AN UPGRADE TO OSX.5 LEOPARD. It is NOT an upgrade to OSX.4 Tiger. There is no scam. You keep wanting to ascribe evil motives to business decisions. YOU are the one who thinks and posts like a DUer. Wow! Businesses are "evil." Businesses are trying to steal from the customers because they are "greedy." The scam only exists in your and Bott's minds.
As to trumpeting the upgrade from Tiger to Snow Leopard... why would they expend any advertising money at all? These people have had 20 months to upgrade to Leopard and haven't. They are fewer than 12% of the early adopters and seem to be quite happy with Tiger. The option to upgrade is there, if they want it.
If they don't, they won't... and they won't be offended at the cost if they don't. If they do, they get iLife'09 ($79), iWork'09 ($79), a Leopard license ($129) and the Snow Leopard upgrade ($29), a package worth $369, if bought separately, for only $169 ($200 off the separate retail prices if the package components were bought individually). They have not hidden anything. There is nothing sneaky, as you claim. There is no fine print. There is no bait and switch scam as you and Bott are implying.
Incidentally, Apple announced upgrade policies at the WWDC (June 8, 2009) Keynote before Microsoft's announced Windows 7 pricing on June 25th. The pricing of Windows, whether it's free or discounted for a short period, is irrelevant. Apple is not competing against Microsoft for Operating System sales. Only you guys seem to think they are.
You don't think Apple's marketing department are using psychology to get new customers by using shady tactics like this?
No, Blue, I don't think Apple is trying to get "new" customers by using shady tactics. This is an UPGRADE, it is meant for already existing customers who have purchased that which is being upgraded. They are certainly NOT "new customers."
SO WHAT? Are you implying that the upgrade path from OS X.4 to OS.6 is somehow analogous? I don't think so. OS X.5 Leopard is not a FAILED OS. Apple has no need, like Microsoft has, to make amends to a customer base that feels they wasted money buying the previous upgraded OS.
So, in response to Apple's lower prices for Snow Leopard, Microsoft decided to undercut itself and slash prices. They must be running scared... or they are trying to rebuild lost goodwill with their customers who refused to upgrade to Vista.
Why would I say "we thought they would?" Oh, it might just be because that is exactly what Ed Bott said and you said you agree with:
Bott's summation: "Apple’s $29 pricing decision is a clever one. They’re counting on gullible reporters and analysts to make oversimplified comparisons with Windows 7, and they’re hoping to goad Ballmer and Company into reacting with a slashed price of their own. If Microsoft is smart, they won’t take the bait."
Blue Highway's assertion: I think Ed Bott summed up his article well with these last 2 paragraphs. I happen to agree with him and don't see how you can spin it any other way Swordmaker. Knowing you though, you can't help it and you will try to spin it anyways.
Looks, waddles, and quacks... it's a duck. YOU said you agreed. Ergo, both you and Bott think that Apple was wanting Microsoft to slash prices.
Is it you are another Mac user that uses the same logic to try to attack a PC user in your following example:
Most Liberals eat carrots. You eat carrots. Ergo, you are a carrot, er, Liberal. Faulty logic.
you are using this same kind of logic you were accusing a PC user of.
YOU said you agreed with his conclusions. It's a duck.
How is it "deceptive" when Apple laid out the entire pricing plan and published it. not in fine print, regular print, spoke it, not sub rosa but in normal voice, and informed everyone exactly what the price structure was. It is only YOU and Bott who have reading comprehension problems.
You say it. That's slander. You publish it on a website it's libel. Unless you can prove your assertions it's one or the other or both. One of the hallmarks of the posts at DU in addition to the ad hominem attacks, is the prevalence of slander and libel. As I said before, it is YOU who most exemplifies the DU mentality on FR Mac/Apple threads. Again, you demonstrate, with this entire thread a derangement about everything involving Apple and its products. You have absolutely NO PROOF of any of your assertions except others with a similar derangement who publish speculation as fact and their own opinion as proof.
You have been challenged numerous times to prove your claims. You have never bothered. You every post indicates the classic trail of the unfortunately not-so-rare creature the FR Troll.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.