Mac OS X Snow Leopard Discussion

By giga
in Apple (macOS)

 Share

Recommended Posts

Grand Master

Simon Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted

I would buy it for $129 if the changes are as good as everyone is saying. But would regular users? Probably not. So I doubt Apple will charge the full price anyway. You can only put so much market spin on "we pretty much rewrote all the code, kept the same features and made everything faster". If it looks the same to a user, it is the same to the user. While a speed increase is huge for people like us, most people actually think Vista and Mac OS X are perfectly fast, when both companies have pretty much admitted they aren't.

Grand Master

Quillz

Posted
Posted
I would buy it for $129 if the changes are as good as everyone is saying. But would regular users? Probably not. So I doubt Apple will charge the full price anyway. You can only put so much market spin on "we pretty much rewrote all the code, kept the same features and made everything faster". If it looks the same to a user, it is the same to the user. While a speed increase is huge for people like us, most people actually think Vista and Mac OS X are perfectly fast, when both companies have pretty much admitted they aren't.

I would argue that not all "regular users" are like that. To many, speed increases, or the notion of getting more done more efficiently is as good a feature as anything else. Frankly, how many features in Leopard get used every single day? Sure, I use Time Machine and Quick Look, but the improvements to Dictionary? Never used them. The improvements made to the Finder? I use Path Finder.

Now, imagine being told that in Snow Leopard, your system will boot faster, shut down faster and use overall fewer system resources. And this is a feature that's always on and invisible. That is a far better "feature" than being able to browse Wikipedia through the Dictionary. I really do think that Snow Leopard will continue to be sold for $129. They sold Puma for that price, and that was really nothing more than a service pack to 10.0.

Grand Master

Quillz

Posted
Posted
Wasn't Puma a free upgrade, though?

Only if you already had Cheetah. Otherwise, it too cost $129. If Apple got away with charging for Puma, which literally added NO major end-user features, then they will be charging for Snow Leopard, too.

Grand Master

giga Veteran

Posted
  • Author
  • Veteran
Posted
Only if you already had Cheetah. Otherwise, it too cost $129. If Apple got away with charging for Puma, which literally added NO major end-user features, then they will be charging for Snow Leopard, too.

If you didn't have Cheetah, then you had OS 9. Paying $129 from 9 to 10.1 wasn't exactly a highway robbery.

Grand Master

Quillz

Posted
Posted
If you didn't have Cheetah, then you had OS 9. Paying $129 from 9 to 10.1 wasn't exactly a highway robbery.

A lot of critics didn't think so. And they felt justified considering Apple didn't make Mac OS X default on their computers until 10.1.2, which was released in late 2001, a full two months after Puma was first released.

Of course, that was then. Snow Leopard will be released under a totally different atmosphere.

Grand Master

giga Veteran

Posted
  • Author
  • Veteran
Posted
A lot of critics didn't think so. And they felt justified considering Apple didn't make Mac OS X default on their computers until 10.1.2, which was released in late 2001, a full two months after Puma was first released.

Of course, that was then. Snow Leopard will be released under a totally different atmosphere.

So you're saying that Apple shouldn't have charged for people going from OS9 to 10.1? Sure it was still buggy, but it was a totally different operating system from 9.

Grand Master

Quillz

Posted
Posted
So you're saying that Apple shouldn't have charged for people going from OS9 to 10.1? Sure it was still buggy, but it was a totally different operating system from 9.

No, I didn't say that at all. My whole point was that if Apple charged $129 for Puma, they will certainly charge $129 for Snow Leopard as well, considering that Snow Leopard will actually contain a lot of end-user features, but in terms of system performance.

Grand Master

giga Veteran

Posted
  • Author
  • Veteran
Posted
No, I didn't say that at all. My whole point was that if Apple charged $129 for Puma, they will certainly charge $129 for Snow Leopard as well, considering that Snow Leopard will actually contain a lot of end-user features, but in terms of system performance.

If we're making a comparing of Cheetah (10.0) to Leopard (10.5), then Snow Leopard (10.6) should be free like Puma (10.1)--which mainly had performance and stability improvements. Apple didn't charge OS X users for Puma--only OS 9 users. (which is irrelevant now)

Grand Master

LTD

Posted
Posted
So you're saying that Apple shouldn't have charged for people going from OS9 to 10.1? Sure it was still buggy, but it was a totally different operating system from 9.

Buggy or not, OS X 10.1 was a magnitude better (far better) then OS 9.

OS 8 and OS 9 only saw the light of day because Apple couldn't come up with anything better other than stopgap solutions, until someone had a better idea. Their whole OS paradigm was failing and the dev process was a joke, as it had been for a few years prior. Developers and previous partners were ready to dump Apple entirely until Steve finally returned and turned things around.

OS 8 and 9 weren't terrible, but they were disappointments considering what Apple could have done were it not for such colossal mismanagement. OS X, bugs and all, was a breath of fresh air.

Grand Master

Chicane-UK Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted

Finding myself in a bit of a dilemma. In short, Snow Leopard will have to be jaw droppingly good to make me buy it. If it's merely evolutionary I might be tempted to ditch my iMac and go back and give Windows 7 a try.

Enthusiast

wankey

Posted
Posted
Finding myself in a bit of a dilemma. In short, Snow Leopard will have to be jaw droppingly good to make me buy it. If it's merely evolutionary I might be tempted to ditch my iMac and go back and give Windows 7 a try.

I have the same inclination. If Windows 7 turns out to be as fast as XP, as small as XP but with all the frills of Vista then I'm ditching OS X and going to Win7. The games and the sheer number of customizable applications Windows has far out strips OS X and the Mac world. I"ll keep my MBP as a portable laptop but I'll do all my work on the PC (which is way fast btw)

Proficient

d4v1d05

Posted
Posted
Finding myself in a bit of a dilemma. In short, Snow Leopard will have to be jaw droppingly good to make me buy it. If it's merely evolutionary I might be tempted to ditch my iMac and go back and give Windows 7 a try.

Or, y'know, wait till OS 10.7, and install OS 7 (Uhh, I mean "Windows 7") using bootcamp?

I just wish they'd sort out the network "locations," something like the iphone's SSID-specific network settings would be lovely for laptops... :)

Grand Master

Chicane-UK Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted

Well my problem with Apple doesn't continue to be the software, but the hardware. And more specifically graphics cards. They have all these wonderful quick iMacs but they always have pants graphics cards in them. Even the 8800GS in the 24" iMac doesn't cut it frankly. And I just can't bring myself to pay Mac Pro money to own a machine capable of playing any recent games.

Snow Leopard + baby Mac Pro / headless iMac with upgradeable graphics = happy Chicane-UK. But Apple seem determined not to offer such a beast :(

Grand Master

LTD

Posted
Posted
Well my problem with Apple doesn't continue to be the software, but the hardware. And more specifically graphics cards. They have all these wonderful quick iMacs but they always have pants graphics cards in them. Even the 8800GS in the 24" iMac doesn't cut it frankly. And I just can't bring myself to pay Mac Pro money to own a machine capable of playing any recent games.

Snow Leopard + baby Mac Pro / headless iMac with upgradeable graphics = happy Chicane-UK. But Apple seem determined not to offer such a beast :(

Macs really aren't for gamers. A current mac will do it, and probably do it alright. But not spectacularly.

Grand Master

Chicane-UK Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted
Macs really aren't for gamers.

But there is no technical reason why they shouldn't be. Apple are quite capable of sticking GOOD video cards into their systems - they just continue to choose not to (I guess primarily for heat reasons as they continue to prefer form over function) but it's frustrating for Mac owning gamers like myself who can't get one competetively priced system that ticks all of the boxes.

As I say - if I really have to do it I will buy a Mac Pro, but I'll bitch and complain the entire way to getting it. Or, I'll just buy the mother of all PC's and Windows 7 and just wait till Steve Jobs acknowledges the segment of the market he's been ignoring for so long - then I'll be back!

Grand Master

Quillz

Posted
Posted
But there is no technical reason why they shouldn't be. Apple are quite capable of sticking GOOD video cards into their systems - they just continue to choose not to (I guess primarily for heat reasons as they continue to prefer form over function) but it's frustrating for Mac owning gamers like myself who can't get one competetively priced system that ticks all of the boxes.

As I say - if I really have to do it I will buy a Mac Pro, but I'll bitch and complain the entire way to getting it. Or, I'll just buy the mother of all PC's and Windows 7 and just wait till Steve Jobs acknowledges the segment of the market he's been ignoring for so long - then I'll be back!

I think Apple is well aware that they are ignoring gamers. And I think they are doing it intentionally, as there is more money to be made from "switchers" than from gamers.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Posts

    • Amazon eero Pro 6E mesh Wi-Fi system 2-pack is 27% off

      By cork1958 · Posted

      Personally, I think these things are way over rated and way over priced, even at this price. I recently had Frontier Fiber installed with 2 of these devices and although they worked, I switched back to my own router and AP setup and get way better consistency on wireless speed than with Eeros. Wired speed seems to be more consistent also. Will be returning Eeros soon. I had told Frontier I didn't want them to begin with.
    • Microsoft is making Windows 11's context menus faster, simpler, and configurable

      By tboggs13 · Posted

      Yes, exactly what I have been thinking. Don't make the context menu simpler, make it smarter to learn what I actually use. And then, give me the ability to pin settings that I rarely use but need forget where they are.
    • Amazon Greenlights A New "Stargate" Series

      By Som · Posted

      https://www.change.org/p/save-the-new-stargate-series-let-martin-gero-build-the-future-of-the-franchise?utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=mobileNativeShare&utm_campaign=share_petition&recruited_by_id=376d0b10-cf3c-11e7-a513-03b837c94000&recruiter=836653795&share_id=jVyr5PGfkN Petition for anyone who's interested 
    • Here's how to watch Summer Game Fest 2026 and what to expect from the 2-hour showcase

      By LoneWolfSL · Posted

      Here's how to watch Summer Game Fest 2026 and what to expect from the 2-hour showcase by Pulasthi Ariyasinghe The June game showcase schedule is packed, and with the Sony event already behind us, it's time for the next major presentation to come in swinging. Later today, Geoff Keighley will be bringing the 2026 edition of Summer Game Fest live from the Dolby Theatre in Los Angeles, California. For anyone wanting to tune in online, the Summer Game Fest showcase livestream will be kicking off at 2 PM PT | 5 PM ET | 10 PM BST later today, June 5. The jam-packed show is slated to run for about two hours, with platforms like YouTube (4K at 60FPS), Twitch, Facebook, or X being available for catching it. Like in previous years, separate streams featuring American Sign Language and Descriptive Audio are available on YouTube as well. Keighley has only dropped a few teasers about what gaming fans can expect to see at the show. This includes a new look at Star Wars Zero Company from EA, a major announcement from Guild Wars developer ArenaNet, more Clutch gameplay, and some sort of Sega presence. As for fan expectations, there is hype building about a Final Fantasy 7 Remake Part 3 reveal here, and we might see new details about announced games like Alien Isolation 2 as well. If you want even more games, keep in mind that right after the main kickoff event, the Day of the Devs showcase will begin its own festivities at 4 pm PT | 7 pm ET. This is focused entirely on upcoming indie games. Following this, the next major games showcase is slated to happen on June 7. Here, Microsoft is bringing the big guns with its Xbox Games Showcase and Gears of War E-Day Direct. Check out the full calendar for all of the June events over here.
    • Ladybird Browser is no longer accepting outside contributions thanks to AI

      By Reancarnation_X · Posted

      AI is destroying jobs like nothing before

  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      FBSPL earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Week One Done
      I2D earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Dr Jared Dental Studio earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      RG INVESTMENT GROUP earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Very Popular
      The Norwegian Drone Pilot earned a badge
      Very Popular

  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      487
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      262
    3. 3
      Skyfrog
      85
    4. 4
      FloatingFatMan
      64
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      62
    Show More

  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!