I got my info by walking through an Apple store, looking at the soft titles that are available. I walk in often; I know I want an Apple, there are just too many reasons to stick with intel.
So, instead, have major functionality changes, don't tout it at all, AND only change a minor version number (as opposed to double-minor).
Having come from the UNIX system V school of thought, I fully understand the differences between minor and major change versions.
Microsoft has that part right. Talk up the benefits of even the most low level changes. Even if we don't understand it fully, they will percieve that something of value has changed.
I am fully aware that security updates are not the same as the DOT version upgrades. I'm also fully aware that 2000, Me and XP versions of Windows all shipped within three years (about the same as the time-span of 10.1 through 10.3).
Yes, I have used 10.2 and 10.3, but never as a primary machine, only as a casual user.
Clearly there are improvements:
My problem now is that they had to be pointed out to me by an Apple-Advocate, and not by Apple.com's OS X page).
Some of the benefits are here, but none of the important ones are described in any detail. (These are under General, more than half way down the above page). All other "benefits" are described in a way as to make them look to be little more than Eye candy.
So some genuine Mac enthusiasts let me know what's really behind these pages. Should an average Mac user have to ask Slashdot before being able to find out why to spend the $70 to $130 for this upgrade? Many answers similar to yours seem to go on faith alone. "When I installed it, I found out it was great".
You've got me pegged. I am a RedHat user (at work)... I use Slackware and XP at home. It's hard for me to admit to owning XP, but I have an addiction to MechWarrior and Flight Simulator.. Neither of which will run very well under Linux.
The point about the feature set is interesting, and I've since seen a more convincing argument (some AC bothered explaining a great number of the decent features of 10.3 over 10.2). Yet, there are softwares (including games) that will only run on 10.3 and higher, so if you want to run one of these software packages... you need to upgrade.
Since being pointed to valid features - I can see why even this may be valid... yet, Apple has not done a good job of explaining those benefits.
This is a fair and decent specification of real benefits. I wonder why these things are hidden from the obvious view (Note, I actually included links -- It's not that I didn't go looking)....
Your note on 'iChat AV' being available as a separate purchase makes a good point as well.
I'll return to the end of my previous post. Apple doesn't do a good enough job explaining the benefits behind the upgrades.
Look at my questions and reactions for what they are. Someone who actually tried to look for a benefit (in response to someone who told me there is benefit). I went and looked at the marketing material, and came back from Apple's own site convinced that there's nothing of value there.
Yes, I could have probably gone through Google, and onto Apples support site, etc. Most users won't do that, and neither did I.
It's good that Apple makes a decent product, and has a lot of strong advocates. Otherwise, they would surely fail under the marketing force of others whom have less, but talk themselves up more.
Do you still think I'm a troll (feel free to check my back posts before answering)?
Improvements... OK So I went to the Mac OS X "Panther" page. What improvements to they advertise as the most important.
Finder is the top listing. So, you couldn't find files before? No tool to help you seek what you are looking for? Yes, yes there was. What does this top listed improvement give me? Hint: Pretty Icon layout. How much was that worth?
Yet, I see software out there that says 10.3 is a minimum requirement. So, it's not really a voluntary upgrade if you need to run any of the latest software packages.
Oh wait, this new feature is worth it, Expos'e. The official description, "Exposé lets you instantly see all your open windows at once". O.K. that's cool, I've seen it, and it's neat. Again... more Eye candy. How much is THIS feature worth?
Email?... Prettier.
C-U-See-Me functionality? Not new, just new packaging.
They seem to run out of things to talk about at this point on the page. Hmm.
Anything else, I must guess, were performance improvements or bug fixes. These should rightly have been included as updates to the previous version. Perhaps Apple's stupid mistake is in not describing the value in the upgrades that they offer?
My point is that now that 10.4 is about to ship, what is it really giving the consumer? Will there be more software that ships out as 10.4 or higher? If so, do they really need something that 10.4 offers, or is it merely a ploy to sell the "upgrade"? I really am curious about this.
"Do people whine when a car company releases a new car yearly? No, they just don't buy a new car every year."
What people do you know that buy a new car every year? Personally, I'm sick of this analogy. Software can be added to an existing computer - that's what computers do. To charge a large price for an upgrade that you really will need to get, is wholly wrong.
There are hundreds of software packages now that only run on 10.3 and higher. The same will be true for 10.4. There are certainly no "new roads" that my car can't drive on. And if there are, they certainly won't fully switch-over for at least 20 years (not 9 to 18 months like Apple expects).
Isn't this starting to feel to many Mac users like an upgrade roller-coaster?
Personally, I'd be very pissed off if I had shelled out for a previous upgrade. Maybe my memory is off here, but it seems like these upgrades are as bad as Windows, only with less substantial sounding version number changes.
Now that I'm a bit better educated, I know better than to feed mematic thought. Of course, the question to bear is, if viral thought is to be avoided at all costs, why bother with Slashthink?
Another gruesome thought... if Godwin's law is a counter to a Viral thought pattern (as suggested by Godwin himself), then does that mean I should apply Godwin's spray to my shower curtain to get off all that damned bacteria?
Does somebody have a definitive link on who Goodwin really is? From what I've found online, Goodwin's Law is just an Urban Legend with no scientific backing.
Further, Goodwin's Law suggests that the conversation would be over at the point Hitler is mentioned, yet, conversation continues.
This reminds me of the bacteria on desks article from a few months back.
While showering one morning, our hero thinks, "This guy got published for looking at dirty workstations? Huh, I wonder if what's on this shower curtain in my hot steamy shower will get press, too?"
The government said Gates did not qualify for an exemption to federal notification requirements because he intended to participate in the business decisions of ICOS through his long-standing membership on that company's board of directors." (Bold emphasis added).
Are you saying that the article is wrong? Or are you trolling like the AC you are?
"
...copyrighted his artwork after he found out about the use."
That's not possible. Copyright is implicit upon creation. There is no specific procedure for copyright to exist. I create, I have the right to copy. You create, you have the right to copy.
No copyright notice needs to be given. No explicit copyright need to be posted.
What this artist did was to post copyright licensing terms after the use. Without such licensing terms, then one must request permission before making any reproduction of that material.
First... Cialis - I know, you spell it wrong because it's spelled wrong in the 400 Emails per hour that are selling this stuff, but we don't have to believe in our SPAM.
Second, Yes, and the wedding and the wedding joke (if my memory serves) was a couple of years ago, and it's not long after that, this purchase, and seat on the board of directors occurred....So, you have to wonder if Cialis was influenced by Bill's own needs? It certainly seems plausible that Bill bought into the company because he saw the potential cure to his "intimacy issues".:-)
Yeah, I hate Microsoft - but even if you love Microsoft, and respect Gates, you've gotta admit that it's plausible.
This is the "My bad" defense. I see folks pull this out at business meetings all of the time.
Boss: "So we have an oversight on this account that cost our company just shy of one million dollars."
Lazy Ass: "Oh, my bad. I forgot the change order was under my candy jar."
Boss: "Uh,... Uh, lets try to be more careful in the future"
That's probably the greatest lesson for Martha Stewart - disarm them by saying it's your fault, and you messed up. They'll forgive you. Tell them you didn't do it, they hunt you down like a dog (in this case, a female dog).
Oh, sure! Martha Stewart is facing
possible jail time, but Bill Gates
merely pays a fine! Maybe my wife
is right...
it's a woman thing.
Yes, I fully know that there is no
further wrongdoing than a technical
disclosure oversight, but really, there
must be something else they can
"stick him" with.
Is this like the "Submarine to Satellite" communications that Tom Clancy talked about in his books? Maybe the photon method would be secure anyway under such a scenario - very little chance of someone knowing the transmission site in advance.
Someone further down the list suggested that a timestamp system is also used, and someone else suggested that it uses parity share over some other protocol (i.e. two connections).
I should have read the artile, instead of scanning it, but clarification would be helpful. Is this solution going to be open sourced?
While Quantum physics certainly allows for scientific detection of observation (which would help you detect if someone is merely viewing your stream)
However, with all technology, this could be a common pocket-sized device some-day. So, would this not also fall under the problem of Man-in-the middle attacks? Read the quantum stream (eliminating the existance of said stream), and recreate the stream to the other point. This would create a delay, but without other forms of detection, it would not necessarily be as safe as wires... (as wires, at least, can be physically secuired. Hard to secure open air).
I think that's fair. I am even more forming the opinion (see my other third-level-deep posts) that this is a failing of Project Management.
Outsourcing is certainly a place where details specs MUST be produced, and in India, Developers have the restraint to design to the spec, and not over-design. That's the difference between a developer and a coder, but it's also where Project Management needs to be even more effective.
Language barriers, and an extreme cost to "feature creep" makes a good Project Manager even more valuable. The Outsource company has no problem using phrases like, "We can do that, but we'll have to start over" and "No problem, but that will set the project back 5 months".
Slashdot Mirror
Thanks for the info!
I got my info by walking through an Apple store, looking at the soft titles that are available. I walk in often; I know I want an Apple, there are just too many reasons to stick with intel.
Having come from the UNIX system V school of thought, I fully understand the differences between minor and major change versions.
Microsoft has that part right. Talk up the benefits of even the most low level changes. Even if we don't understand it fully, they will percieve that something of value has changed.
Yes, I have used 10.2 and 10.3, but never as a primary machine, only as a casual user.
Clearly there are improvements:
My problem now is that they had to be pointed out to me by an Apple-Advocate, and not by Apple.com's OS X page).
Some of the benefits are here, but none of the important ones are described in any detail. (These are under General, more than half way down the above page). All other "benefits" are described in a way as to make them look to be little more than Eye candy.
So some genuine Mac enthusiasts let me know what's really behind these pages. Should an average Mac user have to ask Slashdot before being able to find out why to spend the $70 to $130 for this upgrade? Many answers similar to yours seem to go on faith alone. "When I installed it, I found out it was great".
It's hard for me to admit to owning XP, but I have an addiction to MechWarrior and Flight Simulator.. Neither of which will run very well under Linux.
The point about the feature set is interesting, and I've since seen a more convincing argument (some AC bothered explaining a great number of the decent features of 10.3 over 10.2). Yet, there are softwares (including games) that will only run on 10.3 and higher, so if you want to run one of these software packages ... you need to upgrade.
Since being pointed to valid features - I can see why even this may be valid... yet, Apple has not done a good job of explaining those benefits.
I'll return to the end of my previous post. Apple doesn't do a good enough job explaining the benefits behind the upgrades.
Look at my questions and reactions for what they are. Someone who actually tried to look for a benefit (in response to someone who told me there is benefit). I went and looked at the marketing material, and came back from Apple's own site convinced that there's nothing of value there.
Yes, I could have probably gone through Google, and onto Apples support site, etc. Most users won't do that, and neither did I.
It's good that Apple makes a decent product, and has a lot of strong advocates. Otherwise, they would surely fail under the marketing force of others whom have less, but talk themselves up more.
Do you still think I'm a troll (feel free to check my back posts before answering)?
95 to 98 step was 2 1/2 years. 10.2 to 10.3?
Finder is the top listing. So, you couldn't find files before? No tool to help you seek what you are looking for? Yes, yes there was. What does this top listed improvement give me? Hint: Pretty Icon layout. How much was that worth?
Yet, I see software out there that says 10.3 is a minimum requirement. So, it's not really a voluntary upgrade if you need to run any of the latest software packages.
Oh wait, this new feature is worth it, Expos'e. The official description, "Exposé lets you instantly see all your open windows at once". O.K. that's cool, I've seen it, and it's neat. Again... more Eye candy. How much is THIS feature worth?
Email? ... Prettier.
C-U-See-Me functionality? Not new, just new packaging.
They seem to run out of things to talk about at this point on the page. Hmm.
Anything else, I must guess, were performance improvements or bug fixes. These should rightly have been included as updates to the previous version. Perhaps Apple's stupid mistake is in not describing the value in the upgrades that they offer?
My point is that now that 10.4 is about to ship, what is it really giving the consumer? Will there be more software that ships out as 10.4 or higher? If so, do they really need something that 10.4 offers, or is it merely a ploy to sell the "upgrade"? I really am curious about this.
What people do you know that buy a new car every year? Personally, I'm sick of this analogy. Software can be added to an existing computer - that's what computers do. To charge a large price for an upgrade that you really will need to get, is wholly wrong.
There are hundreds of software packages now that only run on 10.3 and higher. The same will be true for 10.4. There are certainly no "new roads" that my car can't drive on. And if there are, they certainly won't fully switch-over for at least 20 years (not 9 to 18 months like Apple expects).
Personally, I'd be very pissed off if I had shelled out for a previous upgrade. Maybe my memory is off here, but it seems like these upgrades are as bad as Windows, only with less substantial sounding version number changes.
Now that I'm a bit better educated, I know better than to feed mematic thought. Of course, the question to bear is, if viral thought is to be avoided at all costs, why bother with Slashthink?
Another gruesome thought... if Godwin's law is a counter to a Viral thought pattern (as suggested by Godwin himself), then does that mean I should apply Godwin's spray to my shower curtain to get off all that damned bacteria?
Yes, it was a feeble attempt to get back on topic
Does somebody have a definitive link on who Goodwin really is? From what I've found online, Goodwin's Law is just an Urban Legend with no scientific backing.
Further, Goodwin's Law suggests that the conversation would be over at the point Hitler is mentioned, yet, conversation continues.
While showering one morning, our hero thinks, "This guy got published for looking at dirty workstations? Huh, I wonder if what's on this shower curtain in my hot steamy shower will get press, too?"
Are you saying that the article is wrong? Or are you trolling like the AC you are?
No copyright notice needs to be given. No explicit copyright need to be posted.
Educate yourself.
What this artist did was to post copyright licensing terms after the use. Without such licensing terms, then one must request permission before making any reproduction of that material.
Second, Yes, and the wedding and the wedding joke (if my memory serves) was a couple of years ago, and it's not long after that, this purchase, and seat on the board of directors occurred. ...So, you have to wonder if Cialis was influenced by Bill's own needs? It certainly seems plausible that Bill bought into the company because he saw the potential cure to his "intimacy issues". :-)
Yeah, I hate Microsoft - but even if you love Microsoft, and respect Gates, you've gotta admit that it's plausible.
Funny that's about the same time this investment took place, and (incidentally) when he joined their board of directors.
Do I smell an errie resemblance to truth???
Boss: "So we have an oversight on this account that cost our company just shy of one million dollars." ... Uh, lets try to be more careful in the future"
Lazy Ass: "Oh, my bad. I forgot the change order was under my candy jar."
Boss: "Uh,
That's probably the greatest lesson for Martha Stewart - disarm them by saying it's your fault, and you messed up. They'll forgive you. Tell them you didn't do it, they hunt you down like a dog (in this case, a female dog).
Yes, you heard that right: MS Drugs.
Oh, sure! Martha Stewart is facing possible jail time, but Bill Gates merely pays a fine! Maybe my wife is right...
it's a woman thing.
Yes, I fully know that there is no further wrongdoing than a technical disclosure oversight, but really, there must be something else they can "stick him" with.
On the other hand, MS Drugs !?!?
Someone further down the list suggested that a timestamp system is also used, and someone else suggested that it uses parity share over some other protocol (i.e. two connections).
I should have read the artile, instead of scanning it, but clarification would be helpful. Is this solution going to be open sourced?
So, if I interpret this correctly - it's set up more like Kerberos, with a Quantum twist.
While Quantum physics certainly allows for scientific detection of observation (which would help you detect if someone is merely viewing your stream)
However, with all technology, this could be a common pocket-sized device some-day. So, would this not also fall under the problem of Man-in-the middle attacks? Read the quantum stream (eliminating the existance of said stream), and recreate the stream to the other point. This would create a delay, but without other forms of detection, it would not necessarily be as safe as wires... (as wires, at least, can be physically secuired. Hard to secure open air).
Outsourcing is certainly a place where details specs MUST be produced, and in India, Developers have the restraint to design to the spec, and not over-design. That's the difference between a developer and a coder, but it's also where Project Management needs to be even more effective.
Language barriers, and an extreme cost to "feature creep" makes a good Project Manager even more valuable. The Outsource company has no problem using phrases like, "We can do that, but we'll have to start over" and "No problem, but that will set the project back 5 months".