Apple: 2 million copies of Leopard sold
By Thomas Ricker 
posted Oct 30th 2007 9:04AM
posted Oct 30th 2007 9:04AM
Please note: If you're a current Engadget commenter, you do not need to re-register. Simply login and you will be prompted to select a username.
It's not really that much of a surprise, is it? I mean, Their market share is up, so sales of the OS will be up. Of course, it helps that the users don't have to buy a whole new computer just to make it run.
Unless you have a G3.
Actually - Leopard doesn't run on any of my Macs (although ironically, with the Brazil patch, I can kinda make it run on my PCs...).
Vista, on the other hand, runs on all my PCs including two four-year old Shuttles.
If your running a G3 why bother? Get a Mac Mini at that point.
Jeff,
Do you have any PCs that are six years or older that you've installed Vista on? How are they holding up?
Yes, and I am sure that if Apple wanted, they could make a feature free version of Leopard that could run on ancient equipment, but seriously, what is the point? That is what Jaguar, or Tiger is for. Microsoft's point in making it possible for the OS to run on old PCs is that they can say "Hey, look, it runs on anything!" and impress people like you, but if the features are the same as the previous operating system, and it takes your 386 30 minutes to boot up & is still incapable of being a viable, functioning solution to your work / play it is in fact, outside of geek cred - pointless. The whole allure of Vista was the bells & whistles, the eye candy. It's like thinking your getting a Mercedes Benz, and you end up with Chrysler (same company now)
The truth is, you need a pretty up to date system to run Vista full on.
The next version of what ever MS decides to call their OS will be rife with ideas completely lifted from Leopard, yet not implemented as well. This makes MS fans upset, but it is the 100% truth since Windows 3.1. Those of you who consistently want to point to market share of the OSes, look deeper into it. Then, look at the market share trends over the last 5 years, and look at the stock prices of all your favorite computer & software companies and compare it to Apple. You are making comments here that expose you as someone who is blindly, and foolishly defending a company they obviously do not know anything about, and belittling another company which they also know nothing about.
It is like a parade of stubborn ignorance.
I don't know how you thought we'd respond to what you obviously thought was beautiful prose, but frankly, the point of windows running on just about anything is that unlike Mac OS, you aren't technically locked into their own hardware (osx86, blah blah blah), and so Microsoft has nothing to gain by requiring you to upgrade your computer, but could easily lose a sale if it did.
FYI, the next version of windows has been in development for some time now, because it's effectively dumping the legacy code that makes windows work with everything and on everything. So, you can go spew your grade school level propaganda elsewhere.
actually mercedes and chrysler are not the same company now. they were from 1998 to mid 2007 then mercedes put chrysler/dodge/jeep on the open market, cerberus investment group bought them and finallized the purchase a few months ago.
and oh yeah i agree with john (at least mostly) microsoft "7" is supposed to be completly new but by the time it comes out i think they'll make it run on some older stuff, just maybe not as old as they've previously done. (like maybe computers from 2 years before the release of the os will be able to run it but not much past that 2 year mark, but really who knows, and why do we care so much?
I just want to point out one thing. Apple has 870 million shares outstanding, Microsoft over 9 Billion, or roughly 10 times the number of shares in the wild. When Apple stock approaches $350 a share (what Microsoft would be after a reverse 10 to 1 split to bring parity) Microsoft will have something to worry about. Until then just remember Microsoft is primarily a software company that has to sell to the lowest common demonitator, and Apple is a hardware company that markets a unix OS to sell its hardware. If you want to compare companies compare Apple to Dell, at least they are in the same core business.
it's amazing how good leopard is. it has so far been 100% capable of crashing every nikon software, lightroom, capture1 and even more other applications.
it's amazing how leopard hates 3rd party applications like iphone.
great job apple!!! prob not as fast as vista but it took tiger 6 weeks!!!
Obviously this thread has descended into the predictable Vista/Microsoft bash-o-thon, but lets look at this rationally.
2 Million in the first weekend is nothing out of the ordinary with an Apple product. Apple has always had 2 million fans that want to be part of the first wave of Apple users to get the new toy. Sales will start to trail off as with most of Apple's products. so next weekend there wont be 2 million sold, and I'm sure there wont be an article with huge graphic telling us that.
And I doubt that Microsoft, which has sold far more copies of Vista than Apple has total users, is going to lose sleep. And even those "hordes" of people that supposedly bought Vista and then bought XP because they hated it soooooooo much (which at this point is just an urban legend), just would have given MS a double shot of cash. So all those people acting like these 2 million sold units came all came from Windows users are misplacing their glee as usual.
I mean how many more stories of MS having great financial quarters, and increased Vista sales, is it going to take for some of you to get on the reality train and take a vacation out of the RDF?
Come on Engadget, you're so far down on Apple's teat that you're almost sucking there...
Anyway, it's good to see another OS besides M$'s pulling down some shares, but the world knows that for every license Apple sells, Microsoft sells 100. Wake up, not that many people really use Macs, regardless of the number of ads Apple buys to make it appear so. I'm sick of seeing all the "apparently hip" people in movies using Macs to do things they'd never be used for. I work in industry and know that 90% of all businesses and homes use Windows products while only a fraction use Macs. Sure, they might look cool but their dumbed-down-to-the-hilt approach makes intelligent people wonder if the system was designed for their 3-year old.
How about some unbiased opinions on products and not some stupid paid announcements?
jeff:
how are the ipod and iphone "trailing off"?
"How about some unbiased opinions on products and not some stupid paid announcements?"
Ya, how bout it?
When is the last time you used a Mac? You're clearly insanely biased.
If you think UNIX is for three year olds, then I'd like to know what 3 year olds you've been hanging out with.
Ah, it's cool. Keep your opinions of computer platforms that you formed 15 years ago. I mean, things in computers don't really change much over the years. If Macs sucked in 1992, the must suck now.
Good work.
On being an idiot.
lol if it was was Microsoft it woulda read:
"Microsoft: Only 2 million copies of Vista sold"
@Jeff. I follow both Microsoft and Apple stocks quite closely. Microsoft is up 31% since Jan '05, which isn't bad until you consider that from 2000 to today they are down 40%. They have had one good quarter in the last 3 years. Apple, OTH, is up 480% since Jan '05, and up 622% since 2000. Nobody could touch Microsoft from the late 80s through 2000, but they just haven't performed well since then, except for the last quarter.
So to answer your question: More than one.
To be fair, it's kinda hard to go up from the top and easy from the bottom
Yes, it does make Apple look impressive when you put it in context of amazing growth and customer approval.. Even the 2 million over the weekend may look better than 20 million if you do hours of math.. (or a few seconds.. 2/5% > 20/90%)...
But thats no fun!
Apple Sucks, Microsoft Rules!!!
does the 2 million copies include those sold to retail shops? which are not yet sold per say, just sitting on a shelf? cos this is the way apple usually counts
Um, thats the only way ANY manufacturer releases numbers..
It's not like fry's or compusa waits until it's at your house before they pay Apple.
(and the only way they would do that with an apple retail store is if it is run independent as a separate subsidiary.. I'm not aware if it is or not.)
@ jeff
people replacing vista with xp an urban legend? what hole do you live in. I myself have bought a machine and "downgraded" my licence to XP. as have all the new machines in my company. and our satellite companies. and my friends. etc, etc.
and also @ azayzel,
i work in both graphic and visual effect design - and i have to say i see a far greater apple user base in the field i work in than a windows one.
Just cause you don't use them doesn't mean they're not used
@Sam
Touch a nerve Sam? I'm just tired of all the praise Engadget keeps throwing to Apple like they're the only company shipping anything worthwhile, which they aren't. As to the remark about 3-year old kids, I work with them and know what they can can handle, not to mention while Mac OS is a Linux-type distro, it's actually BSD, which is a bit differnt than your average distros. You know, some commands are a bit differnt. Oh wait, we're talking about Macs... I think probably only 10% of the user-base evens knows how to drop down to a command shell, so I don't think a kid would have a problem clicking a few pretty icons.
and another thing, not insanely biased... I have a Mac, amongst all my other PC's, while it's cool for a change every now and then I don't like being locked to the meager scraps of software available for it without having to roll my own UB for the platform.
@Dominosonfire
You got me on the editing front, though I think this is simply a throwback to the days when you didn't have a decent version of PS running on a PC. That's all changed now, but I think the simplicity of the OS is what draws the average Mac user in.
Developers! Developers! Developers!
And thousands have downloaded it through torrents.
Well, Vista sold 20 million licenses in its first month, I can't find first weekend. Also, the NoPE release of the cracked version of Vista surely hurt sales, I remember having so many seeds when I was downloading both the 32bit and 64 bit versions...i mean...I was downloading freeware. Yes, thats right...freeware. ::shifty eyes::
haha. Well, we shall see I guess. I wonder how many Apple computers are actually out there?
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/07/03/02/mac_install_base_estimated_at_22_million_pre_leopard.html
As of March 07, about 22 million OS X machines. Last quarter they sold about 2 million (mostly laptops, of course, since they're now #3 behind Dell and HP).
So I'd guess around 25 million?
Yeah, in case you don't know the implications of what you quoted:
Apple worked for so long to achieve a 22-million user base, and it only took a month for Vista to top that :P
@Paolo
And to make it worse - that's the same number that Apple quoted as their user base back in the mid-90s... so all they've done is get back to their old numbers - while the PC world has more than doubled.
Citing them by company number is highly misleading because the PC world isn't one company - it's a lot of companies and there isn't the brand loyalty you see with Apple's consumers. This has had the effect of flattening out the market share for PC companies, but since you can only get Macs from Apple, they're immune to that spreading effect.
To see what I mean, imagine that there's just 100 new computers built and sold each year and 10 companies. Apple is one and sells 10 computers/yr. To start, one of the companies sells 80 of the computers and the remaining seven companies sell the remaining 10.
Several years later, Apple is still selling 10, but the remaining 90 are evenly distributed across the other 9 companies, which puts Apple tied for first - even though they haven't increased their market share at all.
Actually, majority of Vista sales are coming from new PC purchases and not the boxed versions.
We can be sure that Apple was not able to sell 2 million Macs in 2 days so we can assume that the vast majority of the Leopard sales were boxed versions, thus upgrades.
Regarding Windows, absolute numbers are not known but boxed Vista sales were down about 60% from boxed XP sales. That's a good indication of how much people wanted to upgrade to Vista. In fact it indicates that people actually didn't want Vista but they had no choice but getting the OEM version when buying a new computer. To address the need for XP, OEM's had to start offering XP again as an alternative to Vista.
I think it's hardly a great success in terms of customer satisfaction. On the business point of view, obviously MS makes money on everything so they can be satisfied.
I don't think Apple will need to sell Tiger anymore....
I was under the impression that Vista's first month sales included all the upgrade vouchers they had been giving away for the past couple months.
Jeff Lewis and Paolo90: You two clowns need to entertain each other in a quiet corner. Apple in the early-mid '90s was a completely different company, run by a completely different group. It was bloated, uninspired and resting on its laurels.
Today, it executes and innovates in ways that MS can only dream about. If it excites you that Apple hasn't yet returned to its historical high in terms of market share, whack off over that. It sells far more computers than it did back in the '90s, and Mac OS X is miles ahead of Vista. I don't hear Mac users demanding a downgrade option for their machines. I DO hear that from Vista users.
If you don't like Apple, great. But try to accept the fact that Apple is growing faster than the rest of the PC industry, and that Windows is slowly turning into a quagmire.
Vista was like installing a new boat anchor on the Titanic, in 2007.
"and that Windows is slowly turning into a quagmire."
It's selling more copies than Apple has users to sell OSX to. How is this a "quagmire". Do you even know what that word means?
Despite news of their recent financial results (which were buried by this site), people like you insist on using the same tired rhetoric to make it seem like Microsoft is just about to go out of business. They are stronger then they have been in years. More people use Windows than ever before.
These Vista downgrade stories are just pathetic propaganda used by Apple users to make it seem like people hate Vista. Again something that has to be disproven every few months by MS's quarterly statements.
Yeah haven't you guys learned from the 2004 election? It's not about approval or customer satisfaction. Its about numbers.
If you sell lots of awesome products, have triple digit stock growth since the dotcom bust, have some of the highest satisfaction rates and make money on everything you sell doesn't matter if you only have millions of customers.
If your products are ok, and your customer satisfaction is satisfactory, and your stock growth is in the double digits, but you have a giant customer base of billion+ locked in, your gold.
I'm both an Apple and Microsoft fan.
Be happy "microsoft only" fans.. You have awesome products from microsoft. Vista is the best so please enjoy it, but realize that there might be something to Mac OS X.. There is a reason the tech savvy community has a much higher percent of Apple users than the general public.
I wish people would keep in mind that there are plenty of PC users that are completely satisfied with Vista and would never go back to XP. The majority of Vista's issues were driver issues (like not having an 8800GTX driver on launch!) and are being resolved on a daily basis. Vista runs great on my machine. I would test Leopard for a comparison but for some reason I can't get the DVD to read in the gaming rig I built ;)
At any rate, I know Mac fanboys and PC fanboys love to argue with each other, but do we have to be so partisan all the time? It's getting to a point where I'd rather watch CSPAN than read the first comment on an Engadget Mac post. For a brief moment I'd like to shed light on the fact that Vista is designed to operate on, quite literally, millions of potential hardware configurations, whereas Leopard is designed to run on a few hundred. They are separate worlds and they are each good for different people, for different reasons. The very reason why Mac's are so stable is because they control the hardware OS X runs on.
In my world it is literally impossible for Leopard to be 'better' than Vista. I beta test PC games and I play World in Conflict regularly. I also do a variety of downloading that windows is generally better suited for than OS X. In order to enjoy the 'superiority' of Leopard, you're telling me I have to pay for inferior hardware (yes, in the desktop market my rig kicks the shit out of the Mac Pro) for more money, and I have to stop playing my video games. Or just be satisfied with World of Warcraft. Come again?
My sister, however, doesn't play video games. She could care less about them. She also doesn't care about building her own computer or having a choice of a video card that isn't two years old (GeForce 7600 GT, I'm looking at you), or any other particular hardware desires. She wants a computer that is pretty and easy to use, and just works. She owns a MacBook.
Different strokes for different folks. My computer does what I want it to do. It runs Vista. I'm pretty sure that makes it better [for me].
...and 22 million copies downgraded to XP next weekend!
[I couldn't resist my inner troll :)]
It's fantastic Apple!
Congratulations!
After all, I decided to get one now~
Hahahaha ARE you kidding me HESHFATTY?
AND I QUOTE Microsoft !
"We sold tens of thousands of copies (of Vista) this first weekend,"
LOL
I knew this quote was too good to be true, I was going to ask you for your source, but I decided I would try to find it myself. I did, but unfortunately it was not a MS quote, but a Dell quote. Now, if Dell, one of MS's biggest resellers, sold "Tens of thousands", I'm sure Vista's totals from all resellers might have reached hundreds of thousands. This leads me to believe that those passionate about Apple and OS X far outnumber those that are passionate about Microsoft and Vista.
Source: http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-6154227.html
I was gonna say [citation needed], but thanks for clearing that up. Why this idiot is getting ranked is beyond me.
This article is nothing but flame bait, minimal content.
Utter fail for Engadget.
So what, did everbody who owns an Apple buy 2 copies?
No, you see, unlike Microsoft, Apple offer Family Packs - a copy of the OS that can be installed on upto five systems - for the price of one install of Vista. There is no need for anyone to buy multiple copies if they have multiple machines.
Um. Well. I did (oops). But it was for a good cause. Cause I was a fool!
BTW, some DJ i met is bragging he downloaded the full image file from bittorrent on Thursday so...Apple, the pirate's name is Rory and his email is tweekbass at ay oh 'ell dot com.
Also apple charges for what is basicly a service pack, so It balances out.
Also apple charges for what is basically a service pack, so It balances out.
Eric: I'd love to know what you're basing that assertion on, other than common-or-garden ignorance and/or lesser-spotted bitterness.
Yeah, Eric, keep repeating that. After a while, you'll actually start to believe it, and if you're lucky, you'll convince a few of your fellow trolls along the way. In the mean time, the world moves on.
Dale,
He was making a hilarious joke about the size of the Apple user base, and how, (HA HA HA, I can't seem to stop laughing) surely with only 1 million Apple users out there (HA HA HA) they must have each purchased 2 copies to get the number up to 2 million.
zing...
Eric:
What makes something a service pack vs. a new version? Just because it looks totally different, as opposed to actually having new usable features?
I suggest you go to www.windowblinds.com, they can give you hundreds of new "versions" of Windows for just a few bucks. Many of them better than Vista.
Hah, scratch that... try www.stardock.com... that's what I get for guessing a URL without actually trying it.
What what be even more fun would be to compare the percent of Leopard and Vista upgrades that later downgraded. I'll bet Vista really rakes in the numbers there!
Magnulus: Running Leopard on my Mac Mini G4 PPC without a hitch and actually seeing a speed increase. Mac owners see less of a turnover in the CPUs they purchase due to longevity. Backwards compatibility on the Mac is pretty good overall.
... which excludes every G4 below 867 MHz and all former cpus
It runs pretty well on my G4/400 with 1GHz upgrade card, and that machine is 8 YEARS OLD. With a minor upgrade, that machine has just kept on going. Machines with 867MHz processors are from like 4-5 years ago.
I'm a little confused by your statements:
"...1GHz upgrade card, and that machine is 8 YEARS OLD."
"Machines with 867MHz processors are from like 4-5 years ago."
I suppose this gets to that question of how much you have to replace before it's a different machine (or how many planks before it's a different boat), but with a processor and ram upgrade (especially to a processor that's only 4 years old), you can hardly call your machine 8 years old. Your case, maybe. But the parts that are upgraded and used to meet the install requirement are NOT.
No, actually Apple's approach to backwards compatibility is heavy handed compared to Windows. Microsoft suppports systems for 10 years (and they'll drag XP much longer probably) and [well, until Vista] include drivers for all kinds of old junk hardware.
OTOH Apples [relative] carelessness about back compatibility isn't neccessarily a bad thing. They just brutally cut of old hardware and get rid of old APIs (not only OS9 is dead, but even classic-rooted Carbon API is now gone in Leopard's 64-bit mode! Microsoft [Office] and Adobe [Photoshop] are going to be pissed) so they can afford having flashy Time Machine, GPU-accelerated iLife apps and new Core* APIs that make developers drool.
Congratulations Apple!
Now we're just waiting for the Developers taking advantage of Core Animation... Oh that will be so sweet.
New Interface Builder with a few clicks can make any application look like PowerPoint^W Keynote presentation. I'm scared...
WOW thats great they sold 2 million service packs, that is a record! lol I just realized apple is thinking different, why give away a service pack when all we have to do is make the dock pretty and call it a new OS and charge $150! lol. im very impressed with apple, they are by far the best in marketing there products. seriously they do a great job at that, they can sell u crap on a stick, all they have to do is slap an apple logo on it and say it will change how everyone looks at crap, 2 million sold it first day.
Ameen to that! Can't agree more.
A service pack? What were you expecting, paying $130 for a new OS that runs way slower, eats way more resources, breaks many apps, and is even more annoying? Gee I wonder what this sounds like. Oh sorry, I meant $250.
And for real, Tiger got '10 service packs' since its release. XP got what, 2?
I thought that whole pc vs mac marketing campign apple had going for them saying that u can use a mac right out the box?? no worries about updating you mac unlike PCs???? hmmmmm
Seriously, what kind of yellow rubber duck are you riding? Apple and Microsoft run on completely different update development lines. Trying to compare a 10.* update to a Microsoft Service pack, only highlights your ignorance as to what's actually going on under the hood.
excuses is what I just read right now, no ignorance my friend, I work and have both mac and pc at home. I actually love Mac's they pay the bills, I am supporting more Macs than PC's it great! Mac has a new update for something every week. its sweet.
It could be worse... they could market their new OS as "WOW!"-inducing when it simply adds features rival operating systems have had for years, albeit with higher system demands and several different confusing versions at increasing premiums.
For people who have actually used Mac OS X, and therefore have a clue what they're talking about, this is a good upgrade that is worth the money... unless you use certain programs it's not compatible with. And before you start, Vista had and still has a truckload of compatibility issues, so it's not isolated to OS X. At least I know they'll be properly fixed before the next major release.
Hey, I almost forgot that WinXP Pro is getting a rush Vista Service Pack. It upgrades XP into an OS better than Vista. Of course, that's not very hard to do. The reason the top version of Vista is called Vista Ultimate, is because it's the Ultimate rip-off.
I like WinXP Pro and I find it very a very suitable product, so it's not that I don't like Windows, but Vista is just not that much better than WinXP but uses more processing power and resources to run.
I agree that many of the new features in vista are useless and suck, but I love my media center! that alone is worth the hassle.
What's funny is that trolls, by calling what Apple added in Leopard a "Service Pack", when many of those features--if even present in Vista in a more diluted form (e.g., Shadow Copy)––were added to Windows only in Vista, are admitting that Vista also is not much more than a "Service Pack".
So let's see: Windows users had to wait 7 years to get an update worthy of being called a "Service Pack", and they had to shell out $250. Hmm.
rawhead vista is completly different! what r u talking about? compare vista with xp then come back.
"they could market their new OS as "WOW!"-inducing when it simply adds features rival operating systems have had for years"
You mean like virtual desktops (10.5's "new" Spaces vs virtual desktops on Amiga since 85 and *nix for years), and realtime, user-restorable incremental backups (10.5's "new" Time Machine vs Volume Shadow Copy in Windows since 2003 and in *nix before that)?
Revolutionary features like Cover Flow, which they bought from someone else? Or Widgets, which they copied from someone else (which MS later, in turn, copied again).
"New" features like that?
Apple isn't as innovative as the fan boys like to think. They copy stuff, make it pretty, and dumb it down so it's idiot-proof for novice users. Just because YOU see it first on a Mac doesn't mean they invented it. Hell, they didn't even write their own Kernel. At least MS does that... Vista might suck (it does) but at least MS wrote ALL of it.
Jason do some research vista had been in design before osx 10.0 was out! unlike apple, which is one reason I do like them, microsoft has no control of there hardware so it takes longer to finish the product. if Microsoft started making there own hardware for there OS we wouldnt be having this problem, but then they would be soncidered a monopoly or pigs for doing something like controling there Hardware and OS in one.
I AGREE WITH YOU (can't you change that stupid handle name?):
"vista is completly different! what r u talking about? compare vista with xp then come back"
Dude, you're not understanding what I'm saying. I'm not saying that Vista doesn't have a ton of feature enhancements compared to XP. It does, and the number and degree of enhancements probably is more substantial between XP->Vista than Tiger->Leopard.
BUT, there are 2 things you are ignoring.
ONE: Leopard is $129 while Vista Ultimate (which you have to agree is, if anything, the feature equivalent) is $250
TWO: Claiming that Leopard didn't add to Tiger as much as Vista added to XP is fine (we should expect that, shouldn't we, it being that it took MS 7 years to come out with Vista?). Claiming that Leopard, therefore, is nothing but a "Service Pack" is NOT fine, because that is insinuating that Microsoft would've put out a package of OS enhancements akin to Leopard for free as a "Service Pack", which is simply NOT TRUE. MS has NEVER added that much functionality to any of their OSes via any single Service Pack or even combined list of Service Packs.
So, YOU go back and compare XP (SP2) to the original XP and come back and tell me SP2 adds to XP as much as Leopard adds to Tiger.
@ I AGREE WITH YOU
Seems like you need to do some research yourself. OS X was out way before Vista was even put on the development schedule. Hint...hint....... All of the features in Vista are basically a really crappy copy of OS X. Such as "Gadgets". LMAO, those are an exact copy of Apple's widgets and the Linux bases creations.
Hey, I'm no Apple lover, but I bet there won't be any downgrading from Leopard.
MS blew it HARD with Vista.
HARD
yes 20 million sold is blowing it hard.
I bet you said that with XP when it came out, too. Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it.
Don't be so sure about that. Looks like Leopard screwed the JAVA developers (well since they are developing in JAVA, they are already screwed..heh) that want to use Java6. There are already complaints of people having to go back to 10.4 who are developers.
yes and XP is still in the lead, whats your point? I have vista running on my laptop with no problems at all, I use it as my media center i do all my video, music, and picture editng on it, I have CS3 on the laptop and have no issues. issues with it.
Total SKU's shifted isn't the measure of the quality of a product. As a wise man pointed out, "DOS Computers manufactured by companies such as IBM, Compaq, Tandy, and millions of others are by far the most popular, with about 70 million machines in use wordwide. Macintosh fans, on the other hand, may note that cockroaches are far more numerous than humans, and that numbers alone do not denote a higher life form." -New York Times, November 26, 1991
Given the number of Windows boxes out there, 20m in a month really isn't that impressive. What the 2m in two days figure shows us is that Apple are far better than Microsoft at managing and delivering on the expectations of their customers.
WOW PAUL THAT copmment is the most ignorant thing I heard from anyone! lmao WOW! mac users are better then pc users cause my mac is prettier! lmao! wow dude you have issues
I'm not saying that at all. I, like you, use both Macs and PCs fairly equally, and appreciate both on different levels. I simply get urked by people who make flap-dragon comments based on nothing more than guff and nonsense. That quote is simply a response to the assertion that simple, volume sales equate directly to quality. They simply don't.
have you read what your commenting on? we are talking about the 2 million sold, this all about sales! if you dont wish to talk about sales go to another article about leopard, then you would have a valid point, but not when the whole article you are talking about is dealing with numbers.
I LOVE it when people complain about the number of SKUs regarding Vista.
If you use Vista at home. You've got 3 choices - Basic, Premium, or Ultimate. That's it.
If 3 is too high a number for you to understand, you shouldn't be using a computer, let alone voicing your opinion on one.
Besides, XP had more. XP Home, XP Pro, XP Tablet Ed. XP Media Center 2002, XP Media Center 2005, XP Starter Ed, XP N, etc.
Come on, if this were about nothing more than numbers, there'd be no discussion to be had. Bottom line, and according to this article, Leopard has outsold Vista in its first two days on sale. You are the one attempting to infer anything other than cold, accountable logic to the data - and rounding the discussion to the relative merit of that product as a result. Don't try to claim that you're gibbering is "all about sales", when you clearly have a grade-A Microsoft Shill drum hung around your neck.
Paul , call me what u want lol I really dont care, it all comes down to personal preference here, with Vista I have Media Center which Apple hasent even come close to getting, but knowing them its only a mater of time before they come out with iMedia, I stick with vista becasue of that,if you read my other posts u would have read that I'm actually Apple certified, and to say im a whatever u losers call a person with an opinon, is funny, I love apple becasue they pay my bills, many people have been fed up with windows cause of all the crashing and viruses, which I agree is a huge pain, but has never happened to me btw cause i know how to use a computer and I know downloading limewire or some other crap on my machine will kill it. Mac and PCs both have the same thing only different names, alot of people choose aplpe casue they find it easy to use, all the need is 1 buttin mouse, lol. I prefer PC's because I can do more, I like Mac's cause they have beautiful hardware which is even better now cause I can run vista on a mac book pro. Mac is starting to sell like hot cakes now, its only a matter time before all those viruses and Hardware issues start showing up on macs now, then I will be there charging people $ to fix it.
thats easy I do lol.
For those that think that Windows has only 2 Service Packs, here is what I feel you need to consider. Go look at the list of how many fixes there were for each Service Pack and compare to the list of fixes for the Mac OS X updates. I don't think there is as much to actually "fix" overall.
I have two Macs that got upgraded and the performance is much better (more optimization) and the small problems I have had were easily fixed without a Service Pack. I think Leopard won't need as much to fix. Just a hunch. I think it is the crappy third party software add-ons that screws up OS's as some, not all, developers don't write code very well and the strangely written apps cause other problems. Mac's also don't have certain types of problems that are inherent in the OS. Overall, I think Leopard is a great upgrade and the only thing that needs to be updated for the release is more features, and maybe some subtle changes, but nothing that is major. Since Mac OS X is now Unix 3 compliant, that was a major hurdle to overcome.
Sure, sounds impressive, but I heard about one-fifth of them were sold to unlockers.
Feel the factually-baseless-comment love.
Dear Engadget:
'I AGREE WITH YOU' is a Microsoft shill.
Thank you for your attention.
LMAO! Im actually a certified Apple help desk consultant! easiest 98 I got on a exam lol.
"LMAO LMAO LMAO"
Shut the hell up. LMAO LMAO LMAO.
swear on my mother I have that cert! kind of funny lol! like I said apple pays my bills, Im always fixing them lol.
I dont get it.
What exactly is this person doing that is any different than your average Apple fan that appears on stories about Microsoft or Vista?
Why is is whenever someone says anything positive or in defense of MS they are a shill. What does that make the people that do it for Apple?
And please don't answer with some crackpot rant about how MS is "paying" people to comment, that is just stupid and a full cop out.
@jeff
Read some of his comments on this story... They're just so childlike
For example:
"WOW thats great they sold 2 million service packs, that is a record! lol I just realized apple is thinking different, why give away a service pack when all we have to do is make the dock pretty and call it a new OS and charge $150! lol."
How many Vista in the first 2,5 days? .... uhmmm.... let me think.... around 100?
Let's agree that both Leopard and Vista are crap, shall we.
Leopard is basically a service pack in a pretty package, and before you start screaming take a moment and think - if MS has come out with a new version of Windows with the kinds of upgrades that Leopard has (relative) would you have accepted it as a new OS or would you have called it a service pack with a price tag? And be honest.
And Vista, well, I don't care how many copies they sold (and they probably count pre-installed copies on PCs, which they shouldn't 'cause you pretty much had no choice at that point), they screwed the pooch big time. It's a good (if not great) OS on paper but in practice it wasn't ready yet (and I'm not even mentioning all the features that were dropped, which if actually implemented, would've buried anything mac has 6 feet under). Between bugs, performance issues and lack of driver support the best you can hope for is that after you spend $200 bucks on it your work won't be negatively affected.
LMAO! I agree!
If you call a drastic interface change (CoverFlow for the FInder, QuickLook) and a new backup program firmly integrated into the OS (Time Machine) a service pack, then Vista would count as an extremely large service pack too... that eats resources like no tomorrow. For example, it can't run properly with 512MB RAM. I interned in Best Buy over in Shanghai, China- complaints about Vista being too slow because of the low-spec systems were common, and they all refused to turn off the eye candy or upgrade the RAM because they insisted that if it couldn't function properly as it was then it was fundamentally broken (an idea I wholeheartedly agree with). New OSx86 converts right there, along with me (Tiger just flies on my Toughbook T5 compared to XP- I never knew a 1.2GHz Core Solo could be so fast).
If WinFS and the other cut features had made it, then I'd call Vista a new OS. Now, I'm trying to wean myself from Windows (I've got to buy a wireless dongle sometime- better than using XP), and upgrade to Leopard later.
"MS has come out with a new version of Windows with the kinds of upgrades that Leopard has (relative) would you have accepted it as a new OS or would you have called it a service pack with a price tag? And be honest."
OK, I'm actually going to be honest and talk straight with you, because you seem not to be a troll.
Insofar as the term "service pack" stems from the Windows side, we'll accept that as the definition. I.e., a "service pack" to an OS is akin to WindowsXP "Service Pack 1" and "Service Pack 2".
Comparing what Apple added to Tiger with Leopard and what Microsoft added to WinXP with SP1, I would say HELL YEAH, the additions in Leopard are much more substantial.
Tell me you think differently. Here's what happened in Service Pack 1:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_XP#Service_Pack_1
Here's what Apple added with Leopard:
http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/300.html
Tell me they are equivalent updates. Cuz if you do, I'll take back my original statement that you seem not to be a troll.
And as for your question, if MS had put out something like Leopard for XP? Yeah, I would've been fine calling it a new OS version. But of course, MS probably wouldn't have just charged $129 for it, and THAT could have been a point of contention. But if they spent 3 instead of 7 years to come out with a list of updated features like Leopard and charged only $129 for the version that included ALL those features, then yes, in all honesty, I would have accepted it as a new OS version.
See, back in the day, new OS versions used to come out more frequently, both on the Windows side and Mac side (Win 95 -> 98 -> 98SE -> ME -> 2000 -> XP) vs. (OS7 -> OS8 -> OS9 -> OSX), but since XP, Windows has been lagging while OSX continued to evolve at a rapid pace. I think those people who are honestly insisting (as opposed to trolling) that Leopard is nothing but a "Service Pack" are kidding themselves because the OS upgrade cycle of MS has been so slow recently.
They're trying to rationalize the fact that Vista took so long to come out by trying to convince themselves that "A true OS revision should take more than 2 years to develop and have X amount of enhancements to it". But that's just trying to fit the current MS upgrade cycle to other OSes.