Slashdot Mirror


Apple to Accept Returns of Mac OS X on Some G3s

An anonymous reader writes "A class-action lawsuit was filed over Mac OS X not working correctly on some of the older G3's, and Apple has tentatively agreed to refund the purchase price of the OS ($129) to people who purchased it for use on those computers, and wish to return it." The agreement is not final. If you wish to continue using the OS on your computer, despite it not working fully, you can instead receive a $25 coupon. The deal will, apparently, apply to the iMacs through the fruit-colored models; the pre-chiclet iBooks; the PowerBook G3s; the first three Power Mac G3 models; and the all-in-one Power Mac G3.

75 of 398 comments (clear)

  1. the pre-chiclet iBooks? by FryGuy1013 · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...you mean the toilet-seat cover iBooks?

    --
    bananas like monkeys.
    1. Re:the pre-chiclet iBooks? by theWrkncacnter · · Score: 3, Informative

      I think the nicer term is "clam-shell"

      --
      -1 (Troll) is antihammer
    2. Re:the pre-chiclet iBooks? by MsGeek · · Score: 3, Informative

      No, IceBook is the term for the present-gen iBooks. Clamshell is the polite term for them, iToiletSeat is the impolite term for them.

      Interesting that the Wallstreet Powerbook is also part of the return program. I have one, and has basically decided to stick with 9.1 and Linux on it instead of braving the waters of X.

      However, my blue-and-white G3 is getting X as soon as Panther (OS X.3) comes out. People are having good success with New World Macs, even really old ones like the blue-and-white.

      --
      Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
    3. Re:the pre-chiclet iBooks? by Perl-Pusher · · Score: 5, Funny
      Cute! But I like mine alot, it also matches my iPod. Now thats a chiclet!

      So let me get this straight, if I connect a chiclet to the toilet seat, I can transfer a buch of crap?

    4. Re:the pre-chiclet iBooks? by notfancy · · Score: 2, Informative

      Jaguar runs beautifully on the B&W G3, if you don't want to wait. Even 10.1 did, and the upgrade to 10.2 was absolutely painless; so I don't expect any problems with Panther either.

      You surely can get ahold of an, ahem, "evaluation copy" of 10.2 to play.

    5. Re:the pre-chiclet iBooks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      So let me get this straight, if I connect a chiclet to the toilet seat, I can transfer a buch of crap?

      Here, we prefer the term "submitting a story".

    6. Re:the pre-chiclet iBooks? by falcon5768 · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Yes the B&W works great, my old 300mhz one is actually a little faster than the first gen icebook I own, thanks to the 100mhz bus. My girlfriend uses my (now modded cause she wanted pretty blue lights lol) g3 and shes gone from a mac hater, to a mac worshiper even more so than I am thanks to OS X.

      One rule of advice though, GET MEMORY!!!! I ended up putting the full gig of dimms in and it runs almost as fast as our sawtooth at work. Memory helps big time!!!!

      --

      "Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."

    7. Re:the pre-chiclet iBooks? by Nalgas+D.+Lemur · · Score: 4, Informative

      I probably should've stayed with OS 9 on my Wallstreet too, but I was one of those people who just had to see what OS X was like on it. I managed to have the slowest Wallstreet there is (233MHz with no L2 cache), so that turned out to not be the greatest idea. 10.0.* was nearly unusable for just about anything, but at least it ran without complaining. As of 10.1, if I didn't mind doing much outside of Terminal, it was almost tolerable, but I still ran stuff in Classic a lot of the time, just because it was noticeably faster that way. When I tried to upgrade it to 10.2, the installer trashed my 10.1 install instead of updating it, probably because I'd moved a bunch of things around to different locations, including putting the Applications folder on a different partition. The installer is (or at least used to be) very picky about some things and didn't fail gracefully.

      Anyway, the moral of the story is that it's extremely slow, more so if you don't have at least 256-384 MB of RAM. iTunes uses over 60% CPU just to play an MP3 (although mpg123 and the sound daemon it uses only took a combined total of around 12%...), and doing two things at once really brings performance even farther down. But hey, at least it was as stable as it was slow and didn't act strange on the old hardware at all. I'm much, much happier with OS X on my current model iBook.

      My former roommate has had good luck with it on his (G4-and-Radeon-upgraded) B&W G3, though, as of 10.2. It was perfectly usable before he upgraded it, but he didn't like 10.1 enough to stick with it then. It's probably worth trying out on yours, just to see how it goes, in my opinion at least.

      -Nalgas D. Lemur

    8. Re:the pre-chiclet iBooks? by melatonin · · Score: 3, Informative
      When I tried to upgrade it to 10.2, the installer trashed my 10.1 install instead of updating it

      This has nothing to do with your machine being old.

      The 10.2.0 installer disk is the easiest way to trash any Mac, new or old. Check out Apple's support forums, there were people buying brand new Macs which came with 10.2 who reformatted their drives so they could re-partition it, and they couldn't install 10.2!! They were left with useless Macs with no operating system (except for OS 9, if they wanted that).

      My own examples,

      • Digital Audio G4. 10.0 installs fine. 10.0.3 does not install (can't remember details). 10.1 installs fine. 10.1.3 does not (kernel panics through install, after first reboot, all kinds of crap). 10.2.0 installs fine, no problems at all.
      • QuickSilver G4 - purchased a bit before 10.2 was released. 10.2 gets an error after trying to install. Hard drive is still intact with original 10.1 installation. Impossible to upgrade machine to 10.2.0 (this is a newer G4 than the Digital Audio).
      • iMac DV - Upgrading 10.1 to 10.2 works (older than G4 and QuickSilver). Not sure about other 10.x install discs.
      • Beige G3 Minitower. 10.1 - When booting into the installer CD, and the Mac is in "OS X boot mode" and looking for an OS, it cannot find the boot device. ?. 10.2.0 - didn't dare.
      • Wallstreet 233: 10.1 upgrade to 10.2.0: worked the first time, but every app crashed after launching; seemed as if it were a permissions issue. Tried a clean install of 10.2. Installer kept kept kernel panicing during install at various points. Had to revert to 10.1.

      Apple never really responded to the outcries on their forums, people thought their logic boards were f'd up or something and many just decided to buy new Macs (and again, people with new Macs were having the problem!).

      Eventually Apple released the 10.2.3 installer disk - I got one as part of the Developer Program. This thing is a God Send (or rather, a really good bug fix). It runs perfectly on every Mac with no complaints, especially the Beige G3!

      The Beige G3 was originally a 233, it's been upgraded to a 400MHz/1MB backside cache from OWC (you can get that for about $150, makes your Mac very usable. Get a USB card too).

      The Beige G3 running 10.2.6 is far more stable than when it's running 9.2.2 or 8.5.1 (I have all three on the same box). It's faster, easier to work with, and a heck of a lot more modern. Honestly, I've been toying with some old hardware and old versions of the Mac OS for the last couple of weeks (8.1, 8.5, 8.6, 9.0, 9.2..), and playing with what's supported on what (8.5 supports the GeoPort, 8.6 does not, 8.5 does not support USB hard drives, 8.6 does, 9.2 does not support my DVD drive, 8.5 does.. etc). In OS X, everything works perfectly (except the GeoPort, of course). And reliabily. You get used to all the little patches and extensions and your perfectly selected Extensions Manager Set to get your Mac booting perfectly, with 10.2 things just work. I don't need no friggin' driver for my DVD drive in OS X. OS X didn't freeze because my HD has a corrupt hard disk driver -- it mounted it anyway! This is all on the G3! With 10.1/10.0, using Mac OS X was iffy. But with 10.2.3+ Mac OS X is FAR better than using OS 9!! I've used a B&W G3/400 daily 'once upon a time' with 10.1 a bit over a year ago. This G3 running 10.2 is far smoother.

      "Funky" and old world hardware still isn't supported - the AV personality card I've got on the G3 that gives me video/audio in/out doesn't work (just the basics work, audio), but hey, when I reboot into OS 9.2.2 the Finder crashes because it doesn't like my Toshiba DVD drive's driver (OS X uses it automatically).

      Assuming there's no regressions with Panther, OS X runs fine on these old Macs. It's running great on that PowerBook too, we've got a PowerLogix G4 upgrade for that thing as well, but the develop

      --
      Moderators should have to take a reading comprehension test.
  2. Arm Twisting by newt_sd · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How come you have to class action these companies to be responsible. Isn't there laws that say they need to deliver on their product claims. I am about ready for some tougher legislation I pretty much feel powerless as a consumer and I doubt I am alone. Although this particular mac issue doesn't affect me.

    --
    ***I GOT NUTHIN***
    1. Re:Arm Twisting by DarkBlackFox · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Wouldn't a more elegant solution be to attempt to fix the issue? Rather than hand out cash to disgruntled customers (who will probably make copies of the OSX cd's before returning them), why not invest the money in developing a patch to allow the older Rage cards to function properly?

    2. Re:Arm Twisting by itomato · · Score: 2, Informative

      That was supposed to be incorporated in the first point release.

      It wasn't. Neither was the DVD player.

    3. Re:Arm Twisting by krisp · · Score: 3, Informative

      Wouldn't a more elegant solution be to attempt to fix the issue? Rather than hand out cash to disgruntled customers (who will probably make copies of the OSX cd's before returning them), why not invest the money in developing a patch to allow the older Rage cards to function properly?


      From the article (i sugest you read it):
      Ferlauto noted that after the lawsuit was filed, Apple releases an update to Mac OS X, version 10.1.5, that offered improved graphics performance for machines that use the ATI Rage graphics card.

    4. Re:Arm Twisting by blazer1024 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You see, the class action lawsuit is how the law is applied.. You can't send the police after a company based on civil laws. It isn't a crime, but it does make them responsible. The class action lawsuit is how the law is enforced, the consumer who was effected by the bad product sues the company, and they get their money back, thus the company is responsible for not delivering on their promises.

  3. if only by rczyzewski · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...all companies would stand behind their products. I know plenty of people who would like a refund for Windows Me *@&!#

  4. Slashdot really needs by under_score · · Score: 2, Insightful

    A "news that doesn't require discussion" section with comments disabled. Is there really anything worthwhile to say about this article? Apple's doing the right thing, roughly. Sure you can nit-pick details, but what a waste.

    1. Re:Slashdot really needs by newt_sd · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I would like to comment on your comment about needing comments. :) Whats the harm in discussing this issue. Maybe it is just a catalyst to a larger discussion on product agreements. Company responsibility or maybe just maybe you have been involved with the legal fight to get a refund and finally the fruits of your labor are paying off but by all means if this particular article doesn't mean much in your life then by all means lets not discuss it for there are precious few bits left on the internet and we shall not waste them with discussion on a discussion site?

      --
      ***I GOT NUTHIN***
    2. Re:Slashdot really needs by snilloc · · Score: 2

      Or... you could just avoid the discussion section. Original articles ARE linked from the front page. Nobody is forcing you to join discussion.

    3. Re:Slashdot really needs by under_score · · Score: 2, Funny

      And although it may seem excessive, I think a further comment on your comment about my comment about comments is necessary.

      Surely there is no harm... :-)

      I never expected my comment to be rated up so quickly tho. :-/

    4. Re:Slashdot really needs by Rasta+Prefect · · Score: 4, Insightful
      A "news that doesn't require discussion" section with comments disabled. Is there really anything worthwhile to say about this article? Apple's doing the right thing, roughly. Sure you can nit-pick details, but what a waste.

      How about just not reading the comments if you don't feel theres anything worthwhile to say?

      --
      Why?
    5. Re:Slashdot really needs by NotAnotherReboot · · Score: 4, Funny

      I applaud this insightful comment. This is the very reason that every news post needs to allow comments. If this had been locked, we would have never realized that it should be locked.

  5. Hmm, fairly typical? by randyest · · Score: 5, Insightful

    so . . .

    Apple said in Tuesday's court filing that it "continues to vigorously deny all of the material allegations" of the lawsuit but is willing to settle to avoid the costs of continuing to fight the legal action. An Apple representative declined to comment further.

    . . . but . . .

    "If you are completely dissatisfied (with Mac OS X), you can return it and get your money back," Ferlauto said. "If you want to keep OS X, but are kind of annoyed that you don't have full support, you can get (a $25) coupon."

    . . . and of course, the winner is . . .

    Apple has also agreed to pay up to $350,000 in legal fees to King & Ferlauto.

    --
    everything in moderation
  6. Lawyers come out ahead (again) by dubstop · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So, the customers get their money back, and the legal weasels get $350,000. That seems like par for the course, nowadays.

    1. Re:Lawyers come out ahead (again) by Malcontent · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If it wasn't for the lawyers nobody would get anything.

      They did all the work they should get most of the money.

      --

      War is necrophilia.

  7. Apple.... by devphaeton · · Score: 4, Funny

    ....It just works!

    --


    do() || do_not(); // try();
  8. Re:Frivilous by Pharmboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Windows NT won't work on my PCjr. I'm going to sue.

    Nice troll, but its a pretty simple case of Apple not delivering on promises it made in order to get people to give them money.

    If you had a G3, were promised OSx would work great, and your video card is STILL not supported (and Apple said now they changed their mind, it never will be) PLUS you can't play DVD's on your OEM DVD drive (same situation) then you might want the $129 you spent to "upgrade" back as well.

    That is why they are settling, idiot. They are basically admitting they fucked up.

    --
    Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
  9. Whoa by starseeker · · Score: 4, Interesting

    A software maker granting a refund for a product (even if it is under threat)? I can hear the fuses popping in certain brains in a nameless northwestern city.

    Seriously though, this tells you a lot about the both the Mac community and Apple. The machines are so good that people are able to file a lawsuit due to expecting X performance on a machine and not getting it, and expect to have a case. Wow.

    Personally, I doubt Apple deserves this (I mean, come on - older machines tend to not be supported as well, and early releases of software are know to be less solid than later ones.) But it does say a lot about the Apple World.

    --
    "I object to doing things that computers can do." -- Olin Shivers, lispers.org
    1. Re:Whoa by Firehawke · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think it was more along the lines that Apple had promised G3 owners that this would work fine even on the older ones, then didn't support the video properly. The lawsuit was purely around not delivering on promises made. Now, had Apple not made the promises in question, then I'd be calling this a frivolous lawsuit.

    2. Re:Whoa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      Gotta love it. Mac zealots are so blinded by their love for a fricken company that they are willing to defend their actions, no matter how immoral. The FACT is that Apple made promises to customers, took their money, and they failed to live up to them. Yes, maggie, that means they lost the lawsuit and are now paying for it.

  10. Re:Because by newt_sd · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Agreed but maybe if we had less radical action groups like peta and the nra and more normal action groups that actually got support we would be able to have some legislation head our way. We have to stop electing these career politicans and big business people and get some changes made. I am scared for america we are a product of our own poor school system and crappy family structure. We are a product of our own apathy

    --
    ***I GOT NUTHIN***
  11. Except that by phorm · · Score: 2

    They're not "standing behind their product" so much as reacting to a class-action lawsuit. In other words, it's cheaper to cut a deal and say that they'll accept OSX returns for users of these particular machines than go through court (with the possibility of losing).
    This way, they'll only lose a little money on the returns of OSX by users that actually bother to bring it it. It's likely that a lot of G3 users won't even know they have the option of a return anyhow.

  12. Actually.. by devphaeton · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm glad to see that apple is doing this. Good for them.

    However,

    I'm still skeptical for some of their other things, involving Warranty Return items. Example: Boss has brand new Powerbook. Within 3 weeks the LCD dies. Apple is still trying to collect $700-something dollars for the repair, when IMHO it should be a warranty item. FWIW the guy has been a super-loyal Apple Fanatic since the Apple ][

    This eMac i'm typing on was purchased with 1Gb of ram, but arrived with 512 only. Also, the OS was completely b0rked when it arrived, which required a reinstall of OS X. It's got a few dead pixels on the screen but Apple refuses to listen.

    I'm not trying to bash apple, andi know there are other, worse companies, but i guess i expected them to be a little better after the sale. They've been worse than a used-car dealer by my experience at the Mac-centric ISP i work for.

    --


    do() || do_not(); // try();
    1. Re:Actually.. by thedbp · · Score: 2, Insightful

      a CRT with dead pixels? i would love to see that.

      How did the LCD "die?" If it just up and died with no outside event causing it to, Apple WOULD cover it. Something tells me there were other extraneous circumstances that you're not telling us.

      Trooolllllll

    2. Re:Actually.. by haut · · Score: 2, Informative

      I've had similar problems with my iBook but completely opposite experiece with AppleCare. After about 6 months my iBook died, so I sent it in and they fixed it, only to have the backlight die a couple days later. Sent it back again and it worked fine, but now my CD burner was killing CDs. They said "ok, too many problems, we're giving you a replacement" and sent me a brand new one, with a fresh (1 yr) warranty. Then after about a week I noticed the screen was screwed up and they said they'd call it DOA and sent me another brand new one. I haven't had to pay a cent for shipping (including sending the bad ones back to them). I'm really disappointed in the quality control and reliability of the laptop, but AppleCare is awesome and I'm going to buy it before my year is up. If it keeps failing like this then I'll have a brand new (not old stock either, new model) laptop every 6 months or so!

  13. Super deal! by grub · · Score: 5, Funny


    I'll put the $125 from Apple towards the $700 SCO says I owe them!

    --
    Trolling is a art,
  14. No... by siskbc · · Score: 3, Informative
    Seriously though, this tells you a lot about the both the Mac community and Apple. The machines are so good that people are able to file a lawsuit due to expecting X performance on a machine and not getting it, and expect to have a case. Wow.

    It's because Apple said it would work on all G3's as mentioned in a higher thread. Had they not done so, plaintiffs would have had no case. So no precedent set, except that things won't be guaranteed to run on any older platform from now on.

    --

    -Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat

  15. Why I think this is (partly) fair by Buran · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm in partial agreement with this case. While I currently use Jaguar on a Powerbook DVI, formerly I used earlier versions of OS X (10.0 and 10.1) on a Powerbook Lombard (the model with the bronze keyboard). While DVD players were an option with that model, the one I purchased (or rather, the university I work for purchased for me) was the model with the DVD reader. Thus, I used it quite a bit to watch DVDs in OS 9 and was pleased that I could do so. I took it on a few trips and carried entertainment with me.

    When 10.1 came out it was quite a big deal that it finally added DVD viewing support, and there was no mention of the fact that it was not going to work fully as advertised on all systems. In fact, Apple made a big deal of the fact that you could run OS X on a lot of older systems going back to some of the old beige towers (I'm pretty sure about that) and implied in the "usable on older systems" was the fact that all features would work as they were advertised to on all of those systems. I was in full expectation that all of the features would work, and I can't possibly have been alone.

    I was quite disappointed to discover that apparently hardware acceleration, which I have long been told from many sources is actually better because it offloads a lot of the processing tasks onto the video system instead of the CPU, was actually the reason why DVD playing did NOT work. I couldn't play DVDs -- if I tried I'd get a message stating that my system wasn't compatible -- even after Apple released a DVD player update! How was I supposed to fix this? "Go buy a new Powerbook". That was unacceptable given the fact that Apple had always given the impression that OS X would be fully supported on G3 systems. That apparently meant "some G3 systems" even though no qualifiers were printed on any preview materials.

    I'll be returning my discs for a refund since it didn't work as advertised (which did bother me) and because I don't use OS X on that old Powerbook anymore. It's just relegated to Photoshopping in OS 9. It sounds like what I've seen so far is indicating a full refund, which I won't argue with if true ... we'll have to see. A partial refund was more my expectation since a lot of other features DID work as advertised, but hey, I can use the cash for a discount on a new iPod (I want the backlit-buttons version in part because I plan to use it in my Volkswagen, and the red illumination of the controls in the car matches. It'll look really spiffy. :) )

    The point of this case was (rightfully) that if there are going to be exclusions for "it works with existing stuff" the exceptions need to be listed so nobody ends up disappointed like I was. It's just fair. It's a real shame there had to be a lawsuit to make it happen.

  16. Minimum Specs by OfficerNoGun · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...are the minimum specs for a reason. I wouldn't expect much out of Windows Xp with its minimum specs of running a 233mhz Celeron with 128mb ram. Newer OS run faster on faster equipment. Trying to run the latest and greatest OS on older equipment is a trying experience. In general I would recomend sticking with the OS the computer came with, its cheaper, and most likely beter suited for the machine. It may sound like Apple is being all great by refunding all or part of the purchase price, but they're only doing that 'cause they got sued.

    1. Re:Minimum Specs by mughi · · Score: 2, Interesting
      ...are the minimum specs for a reason.

      But it's not about minimum specs at all. The PowerBook I run it on is well above the minimum specs.

      From Apple's "System Requirements" page:

      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.

      There was the original G3 Powerbook, the Series I, the Series II, the Bronze and the Firewire line. So we're talking two series past the minimum.

  17. Re:What were "the first three Power Mac G3 models" by mprindle · · Score: 2, Informative

    The 1st three were the beige models made. From the artical the settlement doesnt include the B&W G3.

    Mike

  18. This is an outrage... by joto · · Score: 5, Funny

    You mean Apple actually has to accept returns of it's product, when it doesn't work? Like, if there was a warranty or something? This is a sad and black day for the software industry, maybe one day we will even have to act responsively...

  19. Oh, GET OVER IT! by mekkab · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They way I see it, the consumer is definitely coming out on top with this one.

    ANd I don't see any issue with the lawyers getting some money for their "win" (qualified, of course, because Apple vigorously denies all the material allegations... but hey, I like to save face in public, too).

    Let see, without those lawyers and their legal fees (who only work on contigency) let me calculate what you and the average consumer would get back. Let's see, add for the user base, divide by 2, carry the 1.... ah yes. ZERO DOLLARS and zero cents.

    You can get all of your money back! Or if you still want to use it, you can get some money back!
    That is what I like to call having your cake and eating it too.

    --
    In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
  20. iBook by photoblur · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I use one of the "pre-chicklet" iBooks. (I'm running OSX 10.3 Jaguar on a 466mHz G3 iBook SE with 384MB RAM) Other than it being a tiny bit slow, OSX works great.

    I think this is really a statement about how Apple's customers have come to expect so much from the fruit company... yeah, Apple said they would support G3's. And they do. It's just when you try and scrape by with the minimum recommended requirements, things don't usually work as well as you'd like.

    Sure, refunding the purchase price on a product that didn't work as expected is understandable, but it's too bad it had to happen in court. I guess that's just the way of doing things these days. Too bad.

    1. Re:iBook by carpe_noctem · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm on a powerbook g3, 233Mhz, 160Mb of RAM. It runs a bit slow, but it's fast enough that I was able to give my 650Mhz Acer laptop away to my sister, who needed a machine. I have to say, I've had really -no- problems at all using this laptop, and I have to wonder what type of technical problems people are experiencing. OS X even runs fast enough for pretty much everything that I do, and although I plan to buy a faster machine in the future, this one is more than sufficient to run OS X in the time being.

      --
      "Quoting famous computer scientists out of context is the root of all evil (or at least most of it) in programming." - K
  21. Amazing! by gillbates · · Score: 3, Interesting
    A hardware/software vendor actually taking responsibility for the code they write?! Is this a joke?

    Microsoft would NEVER do this.

    Everyday it looks more and more like my next machine will be an Apple. What Microsoft fails to understand is that their customers hate Microsoft's "Screw the customer" attitude more than the bugs in their products.

    --
    The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
    1. Re:Amazing! by Zak3056 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A hardware/software vendor actually taking responsibility for the code they write?! Is this a joke?
      Microsoft would NEVER do this.

      Everyday it looks more and more like my next machine will be an Apple. What Microsoft fails to understand is that their customers hate Microsoft's "Screw the customer" attitude more than the bugs in their products.


      You must have missed the fact that it took a CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT to acheive this end.

      Apple ATTEMPTED to utilize the "Screw the customer" attitude, but failed.

      --
      What part of "shall not be infringed" is so hard to understand?
    2. Re:Amazing! by Trurl's+Machine · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Microsoft would NEVER do this.

      Let me remind you the sad and long story of the USB support in Windows 95. To cut the long story short, it never went beyond alpha quality, even in the last OSR patch for Win 95. Microsoft's only answer for all the complaints was: upgrade to Windows 98! And they did what Apple never did with OpenGL for the older ATI cards - they promised explicitly it will work. I can still remember a Windows 95 CD with "USB support" written explicitly on the label...

    3. Re:Amazing! by Carthag · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Anyone on board with OSX from the begining has had to pay a yearly $129 for bug fixes and features

      I didn't know they forced us to buy it?

      Seriously, though, it's entirely your own decision to buy a 1.0 release.

  22. DVD & software playback by mughi · · Score: 3, Informative
    The only lost functionality is the DVD player. Who cares? Use VLC (free, open source) if you are that picky.

    Unfortunately, that's not a viable option. The Broze G3 PowerBook, for example, has DVD-playback hardware. Running in software only (as with VLC) gives extremely poor performance, and bogs down the machine.

    Running under OS-9, the DVD playback is beautiful, and can happen in the background as one does real work at the same time

    Again, it comes down to promises Apple made, and then didn't come through on.

  23. Re:The suit was about video cards by Halo1 · · Score: 2, Informative
    Apparently, the Rage (Pro?) cards found in older G3s aren't properly supported in MacOS X.2
    • Rage II cards: no graphics acceleration at all
    • Rage Pro cards: 2D acceleration, no hardware OpenGL acceleration
    • Rage 128 cards: 2D + OpenGL acceleration
    • ATI Radeon, all Geforce's shipped with Macs: 2D + OpenGL + Quartz Extreme
    I'm hoping to wring some cash out of Apple when I discover that Quartz extreme (found in Jaguar and Panther) doesn't work with my dual USB ibook.
    Apple never promised it would work on your machine. Apple did promise the early G3's would be supported by Mac OS X and people felt that not having 2D and/or 3D acceleration made that claim misleading, as Apple nowhere explicitly stated that up front (while they did state it wrt Quartz Extreme).
    --
    Donate free food here
  24. Better than par by jault · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It seems better than par to me. The usual outcome to this type of suit is the lawyers getting millions rather than a few hundred K, and the customers getting no cash, only a rebate on a future purchase (ie, an inducement to give more money to the folks who ripped them off). The Zip disk "Click of Death" lawsuit, for example, ended up like that.

    Under the circumstances, a refund seems like a reasonable outcome for the customers involved. I'm not bothered by the lawyers' fee, either. It's much smaller than I expected, and they appear to have earned it by really representing their clients, rather than just throwing them a bone & running off with all the money.

  25. Had you been waiting for OS X... by itomato · · Score: 2, Informative

    Let's go back to 1998, shall we? This is when the original announcements were made about OS X. Come about 1999, OS X made it into public beta, and soon after, it was released. Apple's hype wave crashed down on its customers when the product failed to deliver.

    Think about it: You run a Mac shop - graphics, prepress, video, audio, whatever. You're constantly stop-starting in regards to X, its release date, whether it will run on your machine, what software will be available/ready/usable. You buy a Beige G3 in anticipation of OS X, which is promised to perform on it. It doesn't. It's barely usable. It's taken another 2 years for it to become usable, and in that time, the machines have become obsolete. It's taken rewriting and increasing the requirements of so much of the OS (Quartz Extreme/Open GL) that the hardware it was originally designed to support isn't up to the task.

    Do we deserve a fair shake? Hell mutha fuckin yeah!

  26. Models OS X does not run well on by iJed · · Score: 4, Informative
    OS X does not run well (in my opinion) on the following models:
    1. Clam shell iBooks. These have 800*600 screens making them pretty horrible to use under X. Maybe its just because I'm use to my 19" Sony though.
    2. Beige G3s. There are various unsupported things on the Beige G3. These include hardware DVD acceleration, 2D acceleration (on some graphics cards), 3D acceleration (again on some graphics cards) and even internal floppy drive support (although they are long dead on the Mac). However the beige G3 is still better of than the original iBook range.
    3. Early PowerBook G3s. Like the beige G3s these have unsupported hardware DVD and graphics cards. However, unlike the beige G3, you cannot upgrade the graphics card.
    4. Revision A iMac. These were not made for all that long but they have the unsupported (I think) Rage II graphics chip with only 2M video memory. All other iMacs are pretty much OK if you can endure the UI latency.
  27. Re:I do not understand.. by clf8 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Yes, but they bought OS X on Apple's word that their computer would be fully supported. In this case, it's not a G3/G4 issue, it's the video card. Apple did not go back and add complete video support for the older machines as they said they would. As a result, some things (including the dvd player) did not work properly.

    It's not zealots, it's not OS 9 freaks, it's people who bought OS X because it should have worked on their computer, and didn't fully.

  28. Is it cheaper for Apple by teamhasnoi · · Score: 2, Insightful
    to pay for the software returns, or to write some drivers for the video and DVD issues?

    I know this is mainly to drive hardware sales, but it seems a little disingenuous to not take care of their customers.

    I've been looking at getting a PB, but stories like this where Apple just drops support on a whim, or doesn't 'make it right', make me look for a Latitude or Thinkpad. Couple that with hearing stories about the $500+ repairs on Apple laptops, and I'm getting more leery. I rarely hear about problems with other laptop makers.

    OS X is a powerful draw, but the 'closed-source' hardware and the constant ditching of support have me wondering. Make it easy, Apple!

    Maybe I'll go find a P2 to put Zeta on..

    1. Re:Is it cheaper for Apple by Trurl's+Machine · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Is it cheaper for Apple to pay for the software returns, or to write some drivers for the video and DVD issues?

      It's not just drivers. Quartz Extreme is a quite complex graphics layer, using Postscript, OpenGL and QuickTime for all those fancy animations. It could be that this simply cannot be achieved on an old Rage card (at least not with satisfactory results).

      I've been looking at getting a PB, but stories like this where Apple just drops support on a whim, or doesn't 'make it right', make me look for a Latitude or Thinkpad.

      If you want to run Microsoft Windows on it, you could end up with similar situations (a newer version of MS Windows will not be supported fully on your legacy machine). With one difference: there will be no refund.

      Couple that with hearing stories about the $500+ repairs on Apple laptops, and I'm getting more leery. I rarely hear about problems with other laptop makers.

      Strange. The problem is that laptops just are expensive, even if their value on a second-hand market drops to $100 with age. The LCD display is expensive. The motherboard is expensive (and most circuits are integrated with the motherboard, so you have to exchange the whole motherboard even if just your USB chip went down). Most laptops repairs indeed cost a lot - and there's nothing any vendor can do about it. All you can do is purchase extended warranty, like many Apple laptop owners do.

  29. It gets even worse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I do PC support and a very close friend of mine does Mac support and Mac warranty fulfilment. We're constantly trading horror stories and he has told me of a few hardware related problems that Apple still has to resolve:

    Powerbook power supplies that not only burn out prematurely but are a fire and electrical hazard.

    Some recent Powerbook units that refuse to come out of sleep mode.

    IPODs that refuse to allow flash upgrades and units that continue to have problems with charging the batteries even with the newest flash upgrades. The newest units do not have this problem, he says.

    Now before anyone shouts out that their Powerbook or IPOD works magnificently, these are hardware related problems that he gets DAILY and that Apple is aware of and does not appear to care about. They replace the parts under warranty and that's all he can do. I have no reason to doubt his assertions, but I have to wonder why Apple would let such glaring problems as faulty power adaptors persist. Also, he pointed out to me that people only call him with problems, never to thank him for a working Mac so his perception is probably a little skewed.

    1. Re:It gets even worse by King_TJ · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yes, your friend is quite correct. Regarding those power supplies on the Powerbooks though - I think some of the problem has more to do with how they're handled by the users.

      From what I've read and observed, the most common issue is the thin, somewhat fragile cable with the barrel plug on the end (that goes into the notebook itself) gets twisted and stretched/flexed until the wires inside break. When this happens, sometimes they short together, causing the power supply to burn out or in a worse-case scenario, possibly even catch fire.

      If people were a little more careful with their AC adapters (and didn't insist on wrapping the cords around the power "brick" tightly, stressing the wires in the cables - they would probably get much better service out of their adapters.

      Apple didn't exactly show much interest in helping reduce the problem though. (Last I heard, they added a 3 prong plug to the adapters instead of a non-grounded 2 prong plug. That might save their butt in a lawsuit over someone getting shocked on a shorted power adapter - but it's not nearly as good as using better, thicker wire that won't break as easily!)

    2. Re:It gets even worse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      > Powerbook power supplies that not only burn out prematurely but are a fire and electrical hazard.

      There was a recall on these (and many PC laptop adapters as well). Contact Apple.

  30. Not sure what the big deal is... by Robotech_Master · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I purchased a refurb Wallstreet G3/266 Powerbook, slapped 512 megs of RAM in it, and put OS X 10.2.6 on it, and it runs like a dream. Sure, it's a bit slow, particularly when OS X tries to do the funky window zoom effects that undoubtedly look stunning on faster Macs, and it doesn't play the more recent Quicktime movies flawlessly...but it's 266 frickin' megahertz, what do they expect?

    --
    Editor Emeritus and Senior Writer, TeleRead.org
    1. Re:Not sure what the big deal is... by ainsoph · · Score: 2, Insightful

      'Running like a dream' and 'sure its a little slow' are completely contradictory statements on the planet which I dwell opon. ...but it's 266 frickin' megahertz, what do they expect?

      I remember ads. They had turtles with Pentiums on their backs. Other ads had words like 'Supercomputer' and 'Megaflop' in them. I thought slow, way behind the times PPC chips were many times faster than their x86 cousins? Now is that not true?

      I dont get it? Which is it?

  31. Re:Because by Balaam's+Donkey · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It's not simply apathy that's at fault here, nor radical action groups. As has been stated numerous times here on /., today's political situation makes it very difficult for average citizens to even know who to vote for. It's hard for anyone to even get on a ballot without corporate sponsorship (today, political parties are just a euphemism for corporate sponsorship). The cost of running an effective election campaign, even at the local level, is enormous. This weeds out potential candidates who are either not motivated enough, not wealthy enough or unwilling to be a corporate proxy. We wind up with election ballots which limit us to choosing which corporate sponsors we hate less.

    In order to make educated voting decisions, voters must do extensive research into candidates, from the local town board elections on up. Who do they have corporate ties to? Are they independantly wealthy enough to campaign without party sponsorship? What is their voting record? What legislation have they personally authored or sponsored? What organizations do they belong to? Naturally, noone makes this info readily accessible either.

    People are inherently lazy, unfortunately. I can't even say that I put as much work into researching elections as I should. Many people can't even stand contemplating this; they limit themselves to whomever gives them the best sound bytes. Until a large enough number of people are willing to work at choosing alternative candidates, starting from the local elections, corporate sponsorship will dictate American politics.

  32. Re:Why would they return it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny
    what a bunch of loosers.

    The irony in this is overwhelming...

  33. Comparing Apples to ....eh. by teamhasnoi · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Why am I reading a pile of comments that say, "Win XP won't run on my 286, blah blah blah, why should Macs be any different?"

    The strength of the Macintosh comes from the fact that there is a limited range of hardware that needs to be supported from the factory. There isn't 34 different video cards to support.

    Apple doesn't have an excuse. They claimed that OS X would work on all the G3s. They should have written the drivers or refunded the $$$, or never wrote checks that their body couldn't cash.

    MS never claimed that Windows XP would work on your 386, 8086, 8088. IIRC, MS said that many would need to upgrade. Of course, MS isn't (fervently) trying to increase hardware sales.

    It's a little scary when the only computer your OS runs on is made by the same company. Look at Be Inc. and their BeOS/BeBox to 'Internet Appliance' focus shift. Whoops. Lets not develop our OS except for toasters. (I blame MS too, of course...)

    No, Apple isn't dying. In fact, I think Apple is poised to beat some stuffing out of MS.

    Apple does need to avoid vaporware claims, and treating their customers like two-dollar whores - we get enough of that elsewhere.

  34. Re:I do not understand.. by aussersterne · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Excuse me, but G3 machines (all of them) were sold as "will be supported by the new Mac OS" when they were on the market. They're still listed as "supported" to this very day. I'm not party to this lawsuit, but I can tell you that the problems with OS X on "supported" beige G3 machines are more than just people not liking OS 9.

    When I tried to upgrade from OS 9 to OS X, the system wouldn't boot the install CD. Apple told me to replace the Apple SCSI CD-ROM drive it came with with an IDE CD-ROM drive from a short list. I shelled out money and replaced the SCSI CD-ROM with the IDE one.

    I was then able to get it to boot, but it would fail in the middle of install. Once it did complete install, but as soon as I booted, it punted and when I tried to reboot again, the install was corrupted and would hang without reaching the desktop. Apple told me to replace the Apple SCSI hard drive with any EIDE hard drive. So I shelled out money and bought an EIDE hard drive.

    Then I was able to install and use OS X, only to find that video acceleration on beige G3 system is not supported. If you're too new to computing to have ever used unaccelerated video, you have no idea how painfully slow it is, especially on a system as graphics-heavy as OS X. Any window operation, from resizing a window to scrolling text to minimizing a window to the dock can be timed in seconds rather than the "instant" redraws users of modern computers are accustomed to. To add final insult, my external SCSI Zip doesn't work under OS X.

    Apple's responses to both of these problems is a raspberry. There are no plans to add accelerated video drivers for the ATI Rage chipsets in these machines. The internal SCSI on Beige G3s "may work reliably" which basically means that it also "may not work reliably" and that was certainly my experience. They suggest I add a supported PCI SCSI controller if I want to use SCSI peripherals.

    Not gonna happen, I've already shelled out enough to try and keep a foot in the Mac world, I gave up and the machine is now in storage.

    --
    STOP . AMERICA . NOW
  35. Too little, too late? by uninet · · Score: 2, Informative

    Considering that Mac OS X 10.2 is quite content to fry the analog card inside of an iMac G3 (Slotloading), if someone doesn't read the fine manual and upgrade the firmware first, I think $129 isn't enough in many cases. A system that is suppose to be ultra friendly shouldn't fry one's built-in monitor without big warnings on-screen first.

    Of course, if you do read the manual, like I did, I don't see any problems with the system on a G3. Mac OS X 10.2.6 runs quite decently on my iMac.

    --
    -------------
    "You would not get a high grade for such a design" -- Andy Tanenbaum on Linus' Linux design.
  36. Re:Putting an end to the old Mac refrain... by The+Lynxpro · · Score: 3, Insightful

    That argument is stale (ie. "that's not a fair comparison - Apple supports limited amounts of hardware so it works whereas Microsoft has to support everything and that's why it crashes") and unsupported by facts. Do you have an Xbox? Mine's crashed before. And Microsoft has a single hardware platform there. PocketPCs crash? Yep. Again, essentially all the same platform. What about Microsoft based cell phones? Yep. They still crash. So its not just that Apple has limited hardware to support. They have limited hardware that they successfully support in their software. Successful is the keyword that Microsoft still can't seem to replicate even when they have the same advantages on different platforms. While I don't own one, I'm sure the WindowsXP Media PC platform also crashes...

    --
    "Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
  37. take the high-road, Apple... by The+Lynxpro · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Just give these people new machines. First, you'll regain their goodwill. You have new machines coming out and they'll probably buy them later. Second, you'll increase the adoption rate of OS X, even if it would be with a soon-to-be older edition (hint: they'd probably buy the OS X Panther). Third, you get rid of probably excess inventory. Clearing out functioning G3 and G4 hardware is going to happen eventually, so why not take a write-down now when it will actually save you money in the long-run (by not losing longterm customers)? Fourth, you continue to prove you are better than Microsoft. Fifth -- and this is trolling -- if Best Buy can give customers brand new computers after theirs fail spectacularly providing they bought the $300 extended warranty (PSP) and continue to make money, so can you. I've seen plenty of times where Best Buy managers replaced ancient customer computers with mid to high-end units simply because the customer originally bought those blasted service plans. So if any of these customers bought your Apple Care Plans, just give them new machines with 10.2.6 installed. And just as a disclaimer, I never have owned a Mac, although I'm planning on buying one shortly (bring out a mid-range Firewire-based flatbed scanner too, by the way)...

    --
    "Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
  38. Macs without an OS? by Ogerman · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So, what if I want to buy a Mac because of its nice hardware but don't want the proprietary OS that comes with it. Can I get Apple to rebate the price?

  39. Which models are covered, by codename: by frankie · · Score: 4, Informative
    Any G3 with hardware DVD playback (unsupported in X) and/or less than Rage 128 video:
    • iBook: P1 (aka ToiletSeat, 1999), unsure about P1.5 (ToiletSeat2, 2000).
    • iMac: Bondi (aka RevA & RevB, 1998), LifeSavers (aka RevC & RevD, aka 5 Flavors, 1999).
    • PowerBook G3: Hooper (aka original, 1997), MainStreet/WallStreet (aka G3 Series, 1998), Lombard (aka Bronze, 1999).
    • PowerMac G3: Beige (aka Gossamer, 1997), All-in-One (aka Artemis, 1998),
    Not covered:
    • iBook: Dual USB (aka iceBook, aka Chiclet, 2001) and newer.
    • iMac: Slot Loading (aka Kihei, 1999) and newer.
    • PowerBook: Pismo (aka Firewire, 2000) and any G4.
    • PowerMac: Blue & White (aka Yosemite, 1999) and any G4.
  40. Whatever... by wirelessbuzzers · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've seen basically two kinds of posts in resoponse the the article. There's been Mac zealots who are lauding Apple for "taking responsibility," and there have been people slamming them for false advertising. There have also been several "OMG APPLE IS TEH SUX" trolls and jokes of various degrees of wittiness, but that's to be expected.

    First things first. Apple is not "taking responsibility" for all those users out there with poor OS X support. They are refunding them, and doing so to settle a lawsuit. Taking responsibility would be adding full support to OS X. Their settlement sounds pretty fair as far as class action suits go, but it's not done out of benevolence. As has been pointed out before, Apple is a company, and its motivation is primarily money.

    Second, Apple's advertising in this matter was not exceptionally shady. They said they'd support G3s, and it turns out that they do not fully support all of them. The OS runs on these G3s (which are below the recommended minimum specs), but poorly, and doesn't fully support their hardware.

    Fine. All companies advertise in language like this. Plenty of laptops are in various Linux distros' supported lists, but don't have power management support. If you think promising to support something and then doing a half-assed job is bad, look at advertisers that get away with what would be called a lie anywhere outside a court.

    This case is neither a big win nor a big loss for Apple. It does not show that their character is particularly good or evil. Give it a rest.

    --
    I hereby place the above post in the public domain.
    1. Re:Whatever... by NaugaHunter · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They are refunding them, and doing so to settle a lawsuit. Taking responsibility would be adding full support to OS X.

      You've missed the posts they speculate that they tried at the time to add the support, but found that the systems in question were simply incapable of handling it.

      I don't have a perfect memory, but it was my impression that they said from the start that OS X wouldn't run on certain systems. It is possible that while that was known on the websites I frequented, it wasn't included on advertising or on the boxes. Thus in court they wouldn't have had a clear case. By settling, they are effectively saying "We don't think we were completely in the wrong, but we see how some might think so and would rather come to an amiable solution and move on".

      It is a minor black eye, in that any negative publicity for Apple always risks bringing out the worst in mainstream journalism. However, it is offset by the fact that their manner of settling can not be called 'shady' by any means. Compared to Microsoft's proposed settlements of selling more software and Apple looks down right decent.

      --
      R: That voice. Where have I heard that voice before? B: In about 365 other episodes. But I don't know who it is either.
  41. Reminds me of my MacII by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 3, Interesting
    I remember that the MacII originally was advertised as supporting 128 meg of RAM, but when Apple release a version of MacOS that could support that much RAM, it would only support 68 meg on the II, and would not support virtual memory.

    However, if you bought Connectix's Mode32, that would patch MacOS to support 128 meg, and added virtual memory support.

    There was a consumer lawsuit, and eventually Apple agreed to buy a copy of Mode32 for any MacII owner who wanted 128 megs or virtual memory, and reimburse those who already had it.

    It's funny...one of the supposed points in favor of Macs over PCs is that since Apple controls the hardware and the software, the system will work better. Yet that is twice now Apple has had to be sued to actually make it work.

  42. Re:As for Redmond by siskbc · · Score: 2, Funny
    Well, I'm not exactly a Mac OS X zealot, although I have been pleased with my recently acquired Powerbook 17" (which I am currently installing Gentoo GNU/Linux on).

    I can tell you're not because you use words like "I'm pleased with my Mac," not "If you don't like macs you can burn in hell!" ;) For what it's worth, I really like Mac OSX a lot, and linux too - but I can do without the religion, know what I mean?

    OTOH their main competitor's image (MS) is so bad, Apple still looks pretty good in comparison.

    Even a skunk smells good in a sewer. ;)

    --

    -Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat

  43. Clearing up the confusion by E'Laren · · Score: 3, Informative

    Read this: http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=106 470 Apple never said it would work on all G3s. Check the fine print and you'll see that firmware updates and SCSI card updates are required for some computers, but the PowerBook G3 (original with rainbow apple on the top) isn't supported at all. Again, read the fine print for Quartz Extreme and you'd find that only GeForce and Radeon 7500+ cards are supported not the Rages. Yes it would've been nice for the DVD Player to work on non-agp machines and that is probably why Apple made this submission rather than continuing this in court.