Nah Steve is pretty much right. Looking at Snow Leopard vs Leopard, what differences do you physically see? Hell it even has a similar name. It's just OSx finally catching up on the 64-bit bandwagon...
Don't forget that Apple has been charging $129 for almost every 0.1 update to OSX. By comparison, Microsoft has charged only for the major OS release, with interim updates free of charge. Total cost to keep OSX updated since 2001 (including Snow Leopard): $674. Total cost for Windows since 2001 (XP Pro, Vista Ultimate, 7 Pro): $467-667 depending on OEM and retail discounts, cheaper if you don't need features of the Pro/Ultimate editions.
Personally I wonder what Apple is doing with Snow Leopard selling it so low but, then again, it isn't intended to be placed on machines besides Upgrades.
Windows can be placed on any machine where the hardware will support it.
I wonder, if Microsoft trying to push out home computer builders and enthusiasts who build their systems from scratch? Big manufacturers get cut prices for volume keys as well as bundling software so it doesn't hit them as hard.
I tolerate MS products as necessary (and find Windows 7 to not be bad but maybe that's just in comparison to the Vista fail). The only MS product I LIKE is the XBox 360 and I'm regretting recently buying a new one (passing the old one on to a friend) as it supports a company doing this with their pricing.
Windows 7 is essentially built on top of Vista's code with upgrades and all that. Snow Leopard is essentially built on top of Leopard's code with upgrades and all that.
My hackintosh will be the happier system, I think. Many more moves like this, MS, and I'll be buying directly from Apple instead of making a hackintosh. (If all else fails there's always my trusty linux server anyway.)
Such a statement would be true if a computer from 2001 would be capable of installing all 6 OSs. There isn't one. At worst, you may be installing 3 new versions of OS X in a 6 month period, for a total cost of $390.
And no, each new version of OS X is NOT a service pack. To say that is to not even know what a service pack is!
shawnisdirt, just to set the record straight, this is actually a return to 64bit for Apple, they dropped it when they switched to intel chips. There was 64 bit support in the G5 machines in 2003, before Windows. Linux supported 64 bit first.
fh, while your comparison is not exactly true, as calling osx versions point increases is not really all that accurate, lets go with it... so for that comparison you need to only use ultimate ultra top whatever versions of windows, as apple only offers 1 version with every feature (excluding server). like i say below, they are both lock-in, just comes down to which you prefer.
Funny. People say SL is just a Service Pack. Yet, Windows 7 is nothing more than that itself. Please don't try to rationalize that it's a whole new OS, with all kinds of new features. It's a repaired Vista, with a copied version of OS X Dock, and some new wallpaper.
I've been running it since BETA, and the recent RC; it's just as much a POS as Vista...if you're dumb enough to shell out $120 or $200 for an SP, knock yourself out. PT Barnum stated it best "Sucker born every minute!" LMAO
Cousin Eddie - If you think it's just as much a POS as Vista, then you obviously have a verrry old computer you are trying to run it on. Vista itself was decent, 7 is amazing.
Not that there's anything wrong with that. It's just been a while since MSFT has shipped a "major" OS that was as "service packy" as Win7. Maybe '98 after '95? Certainly ME was a dis-service pack after '98. For consumers, though, the only "major" Windows versions in the last 15 years have been: Win 3.x, Win95, XP, Vista.
Who cares if Snow Leopard is a paid service pack as long as it works as advertised. Talk about overpriced service packs. Vista was like 10 service packs merged into one and then MS charged people for it. It was more like a dis-service pack since it was worse than that before it.
Windows XP SP3 was about as good a service pack as you could get and it was free. You'd better hope that Windows 7 is more than just a fancy Vista-like service pack in a colorful box or you can forget about corporations upgrading to anything Microsoft for another three years.
Microsoft might be able to sucker some Ballmer butt-kissing enthusiastic consumers, but they're not putting anything over on the corporations this time around. Hopefully the Vista experience will teach Microsoft about trying to pass on some over-coded beta Windows OS for purchasers to try at their own risk.
The Cobra Tag may help you win that losing battle, acting as a Bluetooth device that attaches to your key ring and connects to your phone, it gives you the opportunity to find the missing item if it's less than 30 feet away.
The most commented posts on Engadget over the past 24 hours.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
After seeing the pricing of Snow Leopard, these prices seem way too high.
snow leopard is equiv to a service pack
Don't think so Steve but nice try.
Steve: Wrong, but your assertion tells us you're not concerned with OS X anyway.
Nah Steve is pretty much right. Looking at Snow Leopard vs Leopard, what differences do you physically see? Hell it even has a similar name. It's just OSx finally catching up on the 64-bit bandwagon...
Don't forget that Apple has been charging $129 for almost every 0.1 update to OSX. By comparison, Microsoft has charged only for the major OS release, with interim updates free of charge. Total cost to keep OSX updated since 2001 (including Snow Leopard): $674. Total cost for Windows since 2001 (XP Pro, Vista Ultimate, 7 Pro): $467-667 depending on OEM and retail discounts, cheaper if you don't need features of the Pro/Ultimate editions.
You FAIL steve.
Personally I wonder what Apple is doing with Snow Leopard selling it so low but, then again, it isn't intended to be placed on machines besides Upgrades.
Windows can be placed on any machine where the hardware will support it.
I wonder, if Microsoft trying to push out home computer builders and enthusiasts who build their systems from scratch?
Big manufacturers get cut prices for volume keys as well as bundling software so it doesn't hit them as hard.
I tolerate MS products as necessary (and find Windows 7 to not be bad but maybe that's just in comparison to the Vista fail).
The only MS product I LIKE is the XBox 360 and I'm regretting recently buying a new one (passing the old one on to a friend) as it supports a company doing this with their pricing.
Windows 7 is essentially built on top of Vista's code with upgrades and all that.
Snow Leopard is essentially built on top of Leopard's code with upgrades and all that.
My hackintosh will be the happier system, I think.
Many more moves like this, MS, and I'll be buying directly from Apple instead of making a hackintosh.
(If all else fails there's always my trusty linux server anyway.)
"snow leopard is equiv to a service pack"
The same thing can be said about Windows 7.
@ Steve and Shaun you both fail at life!
@fh:
Such a statement would be true if a computer from 2001 would be capable of installing all 6 OSs. There isn't one. At worst, you may be installing 3 new versions of OS X in a 6 month period, for a total cost of $390.
And no, each new version of OS X is NOT a service pack. To say that is to not even know what a service pack is!
shawnisdirt, just to set the record straight, this is actually a return to 64bit for Apple, they dropped it when they switched to intel chips. There was 64 bit support in the G5 machines in 2003, before Windows. Linux supported 64 bit first.
fh, while your comparison is not exactly true, as calling osx versions point increases is not really all that accurate, lets go with it...
so for that comparison you need to only use ultimate ultra top whatever versions of windows, as apple only offers 1 version with every feature (excluding server).
like i say below, they are both lock-in, just comes down to which you prefer.
Funny. People say SL is just a Service Pack. Yet, Windows 7 is nothing more than that itself. Please don't try to rationalize that it's a whole new OS, with all kinds of new features. It's a repaired Vista, with a copied version of OS X Dock, and some new wallpaper.
I've been running it since BETA, and the recent RC; it's just as much a POS as Vista...if you're dumb enough to shell out $120 or $200 for an SP, knock yourself out. PT Barnum stated it best "Sucker born every minute!" LMAO
Cousin Eddie - If you think it's just as much a POS as Vista, then you obviously have a verrry old computer you are trying to run it on. Vista itself was decent, 7 is amazing.
Who is this imposter above?!?
+1 for Win 7 = Vista SP
Not that there's anything wrong with that. It's just been a while since MSFT has shipped a "major" OS that was as "service packy" as Win7. Maybe '98 after '95? Certainly ME was a dis-service pack after '98. For consumers, though, the only "major" Windows versions in the last 15 years have been: Win 3.x, Win95, XP, Vista.
Don't believe me? I present the version numbers:
Win 3....v3.x
Win95...v4.0
Win98...v4.1
Win2k...v5.0
WinMe..v4.9
WinXP...v5.1
Vista.....v6.0
Win7.....v6.1
software company vs hardware company people, geeze
Who cares if Snow Leopard is a paid service pack as long as it works as advertised. Talk about overpriced service packs. Vista was like 10 service packs merged into one and then MS charged people for it. It was more like a dis-service pack since it was worse than that before it.
Windows XP SP3 was about as good a service pack as you could get and it was free. You'd better hope that Windows 7 is more than just a fancy Vista-like service pack in a colorful box or you can forget about corporations upgrading to anything Microsoft for another three years.
Microsoft might be able to sucker some Ballmer butt-kissing enthusiastic consumers, but they're not putting anything over on the corporations this time around. Hopefully the Vista experience will teach Microsoft about trying to pass on some over-coded beta Windows OS for purchasers to try at their own risk.
....well, maybe Microsoft did copy Apple's....just maybe, but this picture interested me:
http://www.moreiracastro.com/Saber/evolucao_files/windows1screen_2.png
Ummm.........that was for Cousin Eddie.....