Slashdot Mirror


Ars Technica Posts Panther Review

Nexum writes "Today Ars released their latest Mac OS X review, this time for Max OS X 10.3 Panther. It's great to see another tour de force from the Ars guys. They have, as usual, an excellent insight into the new OS release, and they also cover that burning question 'is it worth $129?,' and Panther seems to come out rather well. Certainly worth a read."

13 of 420 comments (clear)

  1. $129= $10/Month by BadCable · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Frankly I think it's worth it. I almost see it as a "montly" subscription to using an OS. It came with the Mac and every year you shell out $129 to keep using the latest and greatest version. Mac OS is steadily improving and improvment costs money. I almost feel like it's payment for a MMORPG where new content is release all the time in the form of patches and free additional features.

    1. Re:$129= $10/Month by dipipanone · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Mac OS is steadily improving and improvment costs money.

      Coincidentally, I installed it on my Powerbook yesterday. I'm extremely impressed. It's very fast and responsive by comparison with 10.2, and Expose is an absolute dream though.

      However, I didn't pay for it myself, so I can't really answer the question of whether it's 'worth' $129. I think if I had been paying for it myself -- because it is an expensive upgrade for the functionality. But if I had stumped up the money and bought it, I don't think I'd have been disappointed or felt ripped off.

    2. Re:$129= $10/Month by pherris · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Mac OS is steadily improving and improvment costs money.

      Let's not forget the bandwidth cost of offering "one click" updates (no hunting around for a patch). I use RHN with Redhat 9 and pay, I think, about $60USD per year. With that said, IMO, this makes spending $129 a little easier.

      I really think most of the people that complain about the cost of Mac OS updates are those (like me) that remember a time when they were basicly free. Starting with (I think) Mac OS 7.1 Pro Apple started charging and people freaked. Well, the days of Apple's ultra high profit margin on hardware is mostly gone and users need to pay for new features on the software end instead.

      Macs cost a bit of money for feeding and care like updates, hardware and service parts but you do IMO get a lot more functionality (or "bang for the buck") than other OSs especially if you do AV stuff.

      Long story short: Get the update and enjoy the new toys.

      BTW, I use an eMac for video work and Linux for everything else ...

      --
      "And a voice was screaming: 'Holy Jesus! What are these goddamn animals?'" - HST
  2. My concern by Otter · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Well, I certainly don't have time to wade through another John Siracusa epic and still make the first hundred posts. Skipping to the end, he basically says, "It's worth $129, if you like giving large chunks of money to Apple for no particularly important reason." That's pretty much what I'd already concluded.

    Anyway, more important to my mind than "Panther r0x0rs/sux0rs!" is this: what's up with Apple's quality control? They've had quite a few releases lately that have completely screwed their users. They've been on the order of the iTunes installer issue a few years ago, which at least had the excuse that they were new to Unix. When I pay them large amounts of money, I expect something that at a minimum doesn't break my system.

    (As opposed to, say, apt-get upgrading Yellow Dog from 3.0 to 3.1. That I *do* expect to potentially break my system but I can try it for free and send them money when it works.)

  3. Re:Port it, you mofos! by XaXXon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Okay. I'll post it this round...

    Apple doesn't make money selling software. They make money selling hardware. They don't want you paying $130 for their software.. that's just a little bonus. They want you dropping $2,000 on a new Apple computer. That's where their money comes from.

    If they ported it, they'd lose their primary revenue stream.

    Got it?

  4. Why should they? by RatBastard · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why should Apple port OS-X to i386, or any other platform? Apple is a hardware company that makes their software to facilitate the purchase and use of their hardware. They have nothing to gain from porting to another platform, especially one as open and varied as the i386 platform, except the mother of all support headaches.

    --
    Boobies never hurt anyone. - Sherry Glaser.
  5. Re:$129 for 0.1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    so you're saying if it were released as Mac OS X 10.5 or Mac OS X 11, it would be worth it? a rose by any other name.... There are many improvements in the core OS itself that end users won't see, but make this a 'major release' in many eyes. The features that users *do* see are many as well: expose, user switching, ichat AV, improved finder, etc.

  6. Yet another review.... by pafmax · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Although I agree with the conclusions taken, I thik that the real review is always made by the users. And I, as a user, find that Panther is, by far, the best OS X version of them all to date. And yes, I'm happy that the OS has evolved so well.
    Personally, I still haven't really understood how connecting to servers now works and I don't really like the fact that some apps got quite unstable with the transition, but that's ok, somethings need time... I find this OS to be more usable than jaguar, with expose being, sometimes, a life-savior from the evil million windows from hell that insist in populate my desktop...
    Multi-user switch is also great, and I'm even getting used to the brushed metal look if the finder (that makes it quite odd, compared to any other OSX vers. but that also happened with the transition from OS9 to X, i guess)...
    Yet, the best and greatest thing is that the OS is now FAST, I mean, finally it's FAST AND SNAPPY, even on older hardware (400MHz iMac DV w/384M RAM), when compared to any other OSX version or even OS9 (with VM on, of course) and I can say that this thing alone makes the upgrade totally worth.

    So, I like it, a LOT... oh and as an apple user, I don't really give a dam about having the fastest hardware on earth if I can't be PRODUCTIVE with it (sometime SOME people DO try to produce *WORK* using computers, it's not all games, code, pr0n, or hacking your system! hehehe).
    What I want in a computer is that it works for me and does the thing I want easily and without any crashers or "bad moods". Mac's work for me and Panther is a very enjoyable OS, what more would I want from a computer?

  7. Re:$129 for 0.1 by CountBrass · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The difference is that Apple's point releases actually *improve* the OS and make it *faster*.

    --
    Bad analogies are like waxing a monkey with a rainbow.
  8. OS X Email Clients by green+pizza · · Score: 4, Insightful
    For example, I used Pegasus while my wife was using Outlook. With my Mac, we'll both use the same mail prog, whatever it is. Does this cut down on variety? Does it cut down on experimentation? I think so.

    There are gobs of email clients for OS X for every taste... for home users, corporate users, techincal users, unix users...
  9. Re:$129 for 0.1 by Graff · · Score: 5, Insightful
    This seems to me like Microsofts strategy. It's another year, get another 'major release' out of the door so we can get everyone to chip in another hundred dollars.

    Everyone seems to think that these ".1" releases of Mac OS X are not really major releases. In fact, they are pretty much whole version releases, it's just that Apple doesn't want to have to call their new baby Mac OS XI, Mac OS XII, Mac OS XIII, etc.

    The amount of new features, better ways of doing things, corrections to problems, additions to the user interface make each one of the .1 releases to Mac OS X worth being treated as a full version. Take a look at how many reviewers and users are saying that this upgrade is well worth the $130, that alone should tell you that it really is a full version and not some minor update.
  10. Pennies per hour by G4from128k · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I use my computer about 3,000 hours per year. Even with shipping, that makes Panther cost less than 5 cents per hour. That seems like an amazing deal to me.

    --
    Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
  11. Re:The speed... the speed by 0rbit4l · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Regarding "booting back into 9" - you're comparing apples (no pun intended) & oranges. Booting back into 9 is a great reminder as to how AWFUL 9 was. I booted my tibook 867 into 9 not long ago to do some disk maintenance. Yeah, 9 is super-fast - as long as you only ever want to do one thing at a time (I'm not talking about disk-only utilities - we're talking anything here) and don't mind the occasional crash. Face it, running 9 on a modern mac is like running Win 3.1 on a p4 with a gig of ram. It sure is speedy without that annoying overhead of real virtual memory or a useful scheduler, right? - thanks, but no thanks. All the speed in the world is useless if it's an insecure, cobbled-together OS that can't multitask without barfing.

    Regarding 10.3, I didn't notice a speed increase from 10.2.8. XBench reported increased scores in text scrolling (definitely a plus) but that's about it. The killer feature of 10.3 is definitely expose - worth my $69 (academic), for sure. The new mail client is nice, too.