Apple's Missed Opportunity With Leopard Delay

An anonymous reader writes "According to an article on OSWeekly.com, Apple missed a big opportunity by not releasing Leopard soon. They could've taken advantage of Vista's losing streak and one upped Microsoft, the author suggests. 'It's not uncommon for Windows users and technology consumers in general to say that Microsoft missed out on making the most of Vista both before and after its launch. Longtime fans of Windows have changed their tone due to Vista's inadequacies, and regular users are in many cases stuck with trying to figure out why they still can't get certain things to work within the operating system. Granted, it's not a completely horrific OS, but is that even a compliment worth accepting?'"

Hardly...

Windows users will stick with XP, there's no evidence to say that they would give up on Windows and get a Mac. Firstly they would need to buy new hardware, the obvious choice is to go to Linux since you can keep your hardware.

Re:Hardly...

Apple's market share is over 8% now. Those customers are coming from somewhere.

With Parallels you can run Linux on the Mac, and if you don't want to do that but still want Nix software, you can do it. I'm using GIMP, Scribus, Inkscape, Xephem, and other titles I was used to in the Nix world. I've even ran Gnome on top of OSX.

Re:Hardly...

It used to be 6%. Not that the increase isn't insignificant, but all those vista haters aren't moving there. I got a mac recently, but it was more to do with the fact that I've been trying to build something like the macmini for 2 years but haven't come close to getting a cabinet and motherboard of the form factor.

I am guessing that most of the switchers are from the ipod/iphone users, who are curious about apple. Its a shame that their advertisement campaigns do not target this audience - I thought that someone smart would be working in that department.

Re:Hardly...

And that's more to do with human nature. People will rather live with a familiar piece of crap, rather than switch to something totally new that may (not) be better. I don't see any sudden shifts in computing, windows is going to be at the helm for a long time, atleast a decade or two more. No, there will not be a year of the linux desktop, there may be a year of the mac desktop.

That said, awareness of apple as a good hardware vendor is increasing. In the end, a very less part of apple's bottom line will be affected by vista. Leopard's timing will not affect this much, in fact I think they made the wise move by releasing it near the holiday season.

Re:Hardly...

Consider that Microsoft had to convince people over several versions of windows to use it over DOS applications. At the same time, Apple and many other vendors lost ground. It is possible to have an OS switch, but it has to be fueled by cost and features.

Apple's have features, but also cost more. I've argued they don't in the past, but with the intel hardware it's getting harder to make that claim. I do think apple makes good hardware, but comparing what I can build versus a mini or even looking at macbooks... it's harder to say apple is that much more. Even if you make a case for better hardware, most PC users don't know it's good. They don't even know the difference between a lowend e-machine and a highend dell.

In order for linux or any other os to take share from windows, it has to overcome the hassle of learning a new system and losing all the software you've used for years. When me and the redhat ceo can't get windows out of our lives, it's hard to tell others to do so. Gaming is the problem with linux conversion.

Re:Hardly... - I'm getting a Mac

I'm a long time Linux user but at work we have to run Windows Apps and VMWare wouldn't cut it on the hardware we have.

My boss bought a Mac for his house, and the other day asked me if I'd be interested in getting one for work as my regularly scheduled upgrade. It will end up costing the company an extra thousand dollars since we'll have to pay the full price for software that we could have gotten practically free with MS PCs, but we're getting two Macs, one for my use (probably in the developer category, in other words, I'll probably break it a couple times) and one for regular use and we'll be paying for VMWare Fusion, Windows XP and Outlook on top of the already fairly high price of getting the two machines. It adds up to costing more than an extra machine, but we're going to try it. We're getting to try it because Vista has been a pain on the half dozen machines we've put it on and the higher ups are starting to realize something is wrong when most of the major software partners we rely on don't support Vista yet.

So, with Linux still seen as too complex for the masses, we're looking for alternatives and Mac fits the bill. If we can test it sufficiently and get it proven to be usable, the possibility of having Macs in a corporate environment open up. It's far from a done deal, but it is possible where it wasn't just two years ago.

I respectfully disagree with the parent, laffer1; it is not games but corporate adoption that will decide whether Vista is the first step in losing the stranglehold that Windows has had on the OS market. People will become familiar with what they have to use at work and will buy the same thing. Macs are finally becoming competitive in features and pricing and once they are adopted in the corporate world, the home user market can follow. If you ask me, Microsoft got their advertising right by targeting the environment that controls the user experience while Mac has been aiming at the home user when that same user will use whatever they are familiar with from work and school. I wish that I could say Linux is ready, and it would do as well or better for me, but it isn't ready for the average worker. Mac, just maybe, might be.

Re:Hardly...

I'm in the fortunate position of having been in the IT trade for over twenty years and never having used a Windows machine for more than half an hour at a time, so my opinion doesn't count for much. But I run the IT for ~1200 employee company, and when XP shipped we had a path beaten to our desks by people demanding XP now, and when for the first few months we re-installed new hardware with Windows 2000 there were threats of violence. I've heard nothing at all from users wanting Vista, and our policy of installing XP SP2 on newly purchased laptops barely evokes comment. Out of the office, in my guise as the go-to guy from friends and family, I've not heard Vista mentioned.

On the other hand, both my parents and my in-laws, all in their 70s, have bought four Macs between them, and in the office I've now got a list of people who wants Macs officially supported along with the unofficial ones that have crept in. With a team of three plus two on the helpdesk support SuSE, CentOS, Solaris and Windows is tough enough, but with Macs on my desk and that of one of my team we ought to give it a go. IMAP, SMTP, Office, a compliant web browser and the Oracle Collaboration Suite client is pretty much the baseline, and it's all there...

ian

Re:Hardly...

I doubt my experience is that uncommon: I've met one "clueless consumer" type that liked Vista. Every other person I've talked to either said

I heard Vista was crap, can I get my computer with XP instead?

or

Vista is junk - my new computer runs slower than my old one with XP on it

or

Vista is hard to use - I can't find any of the stuff I know how to do on XP

Until Dell started offering machines with XP on them, friends and family members of mine that always bought from Gateway or Dell or whoever would ask me (as their "geek advisor") where they could buy a computer without Vista.

I'm not looking for this kind of feedback nor soliciting it. They bring it up on their own.

Macs are not replacing Windows PCs

Macs are not replacing Windows PCs, they have become Windows PCs. Buyers no longer have to choose Mac OS X or Windows, they can have both. That is the catalyst that is driving the increased sales.

There is little point in running Linux on the Mac. Mac OS X is a capable *nix box, most FOSS software is not Linux specific and targets Mac OS X as well. Plus Mac OS X has a superior user interface. If someone is running Parallels they are doing so to use Windows XP. Exceptions are rarities such as a developer who needs to do compatibility testing under Linux.

Re:Macs are not replacing Windows PCs

"Macs are not replacing Windows PCs, they have become Windows PCs. Buyers no longer have to choose Mac OS X or Windows, they can have both. That is the catalyst that is driving the increased sales."

That's the main reason I picked up my iMac last year. I was teaching in Korea and had limited space in my tiny apartment, but I needed a new computer. I picked up an iMac because it's so tiny (smaller than a Mac Mini, if you consider the fact that a Mini requires a monitor *and* a box on your desk), installed Windows, and haven't looked back. I could really care less about Tiger or Leopard, but as far as I'm concerned, Apple's doing great things with its hardware.

Re:Macs are not replacing Windows PCs

Google "Darwin ports".

Re:Macs are not replacing Windows PCs

Also fink. Its got apt-get and dpkg as its standard binary format, so its time the GP switched to a mac :)

Re:Macs are not replacing Windows PCs

With a taskbar, I can at a glance see which programs are open as well as which WINDOWS in said programs are open,

Running programs in the dock have an arrow under them (subtle but easy enough to see). Click-hold or right-click on one of them and you'll get a menu of open windows.

However, I'd generally conceed the point: I like the Windows XP GUI a lot - most of the issues are "under the hood": security, everybody running as "root" (or having to confirm every action in Vista), registry decay, drive letters, the "shell" filing system not showing up as files, standards (non)compliance, ahh... where to stop...

Re:Macs are not replacing Windows PCs

How is keeping the number of windows down a "good computing habit"? There's not a lot of point in a fast, high-RAM computer with a massively multitasking OS if you're not going to use it. Why not leave the applications open that you use often? (This is the reason the red button doesn't close out of certain kinds of applications.) It's not like it's hogging memory that I need, and while staring at a splash screen for a few seconds is fun, why should I?

If I'm working with a few windows like you do and want easy access to them all, I'll minimize them to the Dock. If I'm working as I usually do, with 10+ windows, I use Expose. For the life of me, I don't know how the taskbar gives you a "view" of ANY window. It tells you what application it is, if you recognize the icon, and a few cryptic letters about it. In order to get any use out of it, you have to move your mouse down to the button and wait for a litle preview to pop up. Instead of doing that, I can tap a mouse button or a key and get an immediate, live view of ALL the windows I have open and can choose it based on sight, rather than memory of the filename.

Re:Macs are not replacing Windows PCs

How long is it going to take for Windows or OSX to get multiple desktops?

About a week. Apple is calling it 'Spaces' in Leopard.

Re:Hardly...

Apple's market share is over 8% now. Those customers are coming from somewhere.

My anecdotal evidence: In the last several years of all my friends who use Windows only one had switched to a Mac, despite me being the "computer guy." And now in just the last couple of months seven more have switched. It's been almost spooky.

One had even recently purchased a computer with Vista installed and got so frustrated that he gave it to his son in law and bought an iMac.

Re:Hardly...

With Parallels you can run Linux on the Mac, and if you don't want to do that but still want Nix software, you can do it. I'm using GIMP, Scribus, Inkscape, Xephem, and other titles I was used to in the Nix world. I've even ran Gnome on top of OSX.

What? What does that have to do with anything? Are you from Apple marketing or something? You think we don't know you can run any GTK app on Windows too?

Getting back on topic: "Why didn't Apple release Leopard earlier to capitalize on Vista's poor reception? Apple should hire me so I can decide these things for them. Yes, they really missed an opportunity there, those silly managers at Apple.."

Hmmm, I'm guessing the release coming now, and not months ago, had something to do with Leopard not being ready.
You can say "If HURD 1.0 had been released right after Vista it might have got some extra users", but that doesn't mean the developers can just decide to finish and release HURD 1.0 whenever it plays well against another company's release date.

Only counting NEW mac sales?

>>Apple's market share is over 8% now. Those customers are coming from somewhere.

Exactly! But there's more to the number than the statistics would indicate.

In the past three years most of my family switched to a Mac. I switched (desktop and laptop), my college-aged daughter bought a mac, I switched my parents and inlaws, and two of my colleagues switched off their PCs and are now using Macs for everyday work. So that's seven Macs in my immediate circle of family and friends. But only two of them were new machines, the rest were used G4s. The statistics in this review are only counting sales of new computers, so these switchers are "invisible."

However, that brings up a question I've had for some time. It's quite common to hear about people switching from PCs to Macs. What about the other direction?What percentage of people switch from Macs to PCs. I would wager that figure is extremely low.

(And yes, Parallels desktop is awesome!)

Re:Hardly...

If people other than tinkerers and enthusiasts are going to change OS, they're going to do so either because they bought a new computer, or because there's something they want to do that they can't now or something that really made them unhappy. That process takes longer than a couple months.

What's really changed with Vista is that people are not willing to be shepherded along from release to release by Microsoft. This is partly due to the Mac's resurgence and more due to a much broader understanding that there are choices. I'd love to attribute that understanding of choices to Linux and open source, but I think that's only had an much of an effect within the developer community. But users more broadly no longer see Microsoft as a miracle-worker for producing these computers that do all sorts of things, because they just expect computers to do the things they do. And many more of them have seen the forced upgrade phenomenon firsthand, and are waiting for a little more bang for their $400. That's reflected in the press with far more writers adopting critical tone towards Microsoft than ever before.

All of the articles we've seen about Apple and missed opportunities (after all this TFA is just some dude at a small website pontificating for an evenings' entertainment) are generally people expressing their desire for David to knock off Goliath and have very little to do with any insights about the market or business opportunities for Apple or Microsoft. To the extent that Apple keeps producing computers that people like and are relevant to what people want to do with them, on terms that are favorable to Apple, their market opportunities are still enormous. And that's almost totally independent of market share - the desktop OS market is simply not an unexploited area in the way it was 15 years ago.

Re:Hardly...

I completely agree. I also think that it can be attributed to a continuing breakdown of the perception that there is a gross incompatibility between Mac users and the rest of the world. While I still do field questions such as "Will I be able to open a Word file someone sends me," they are becoming less frequent. I even hear concern about whether someone with a Mac will be able to receive email from someone with a Windows computer. I think that as the Mac becomes more popular, more people realize that there really isn't a whole lot of compatibility issues for the majority of what they want to do.

A Little Early ...

I'm not sure how you can say they missed an opportunity until after some initial sales figures and responses come out. It took a while before the non-desire for Vista became apparent. It will take some time before people have a chance to respond (with their wallets) to Leopard.

Right, they should have followed Microsoft's lead.

The should have released it 'on time' regardless if that made it feature-poor and buggy.
These comentators don't understand Apple customers. Apple customers value quality. You try to sell them crap and they will eat you alive.

Apple's prime value is in the intangible goodwill of it's customers. Destroying that by releasing buggy crap wouldn't be a good idea.

Re:Right, they should have followed Microsoft's le

These comentators don't understand Apple customers. Apple customers value quality. You try to sell them crap and they will eat you alive.

The reality distortion field is strong in this one....

But even stronger in the article. Come on... Joe Average hears about problems in Vista - he's going to look at the Mac, perhaps. Will he understand the differences between Tiger and Leopord - or Jaguar or Krazy Kitten (oops, that's the next Ubuntu release, sorry)?

And who is really not moving towards Vista? It's large corporate systems with millions of dollars invested in a stable XP and little desire to mess with that. That move will be slow but steady. But really slow - probably slower than the 98 to XP move. Witness all of the systems still on 2000.

I may be more of a poster child for a switcher - having used Windows in all flavors and sizes since 3.0. I finally got fed up with the cheapass hardware that laptop manufacturers have tossed out on the market and looked to find something that might, perhaps, get hardware support for more than a year. I've also used Unix since the 1980's and have two Linux boxes at home (well, Ubuntu anyway) - so I'm not adverse to learning another OS. It's still a royal pain to switch if you do anything more complicated than Letters / Browsing / Music.

(Start flames about Apple using cheapass hardware - they do - I just hope they use the SAME cheapass hardware so I can replace it down the line).

Re:Right, they should have followed Microsoft's le

Krazy Kitten (oops, that's the next Ubuntu release, sorry)

No, no. Its horny horses. Ubuntu still has to get through Indecent Iguana's and Jolly Jackrabbits before it gets to Krazy Kittens.

Missed Opportunity?

Apple had a choice, release the new OS X later, and the iPhone when they did, or, delay the iPhone.

I think it should be obvious with the hype that still surrounds that device that Apple made the right choice. Yes, they could have gained some more marketshare, but probably not by much. After all, OS X is already here, just not the latest version.

Apple is entering a market (handhelds) that is likely to be a much larger market than laptops/desktops over the next few years. The iPhone stands a good chance of becoming the market leader in a particular segment. OS X will still be (mostly) a niche player. I hope to see adoption of mac's increase - after all, I own one.

But given the choice, I would opt for the iPhone over OS X just like they did.

Re:Missed Opportunity?

It's not like the current version of OS X, Tiger isn't already winning converts. After the pain of buying a new PC with Vista then going through the hassle of getting the reseller to supply a copy of XP and all the time spent installing the older OS, I'd honestly be a bit leery of a following that experience up by buying a Mac with a brand new version of OS X. If people are going to like the Mac experience they will like the current version just fine, if not they'll go back to XP. A new OS isn't going the change the differences in design philosophy between Apple and Microsoft.

In Apple's place I would have delayed a new OS and concentrated on the iPhone too.

Soon?

According to an article on OSWeekly.com, Apple missed a big opportunity by not releasing Leopard soon.

Apple is releasing Leopard soon, unless six days now qualifies as a long wait. Perhaps the author of the summary meant "earlier."

OSWeekly is wrong

The lesson from Vista is that releasing a broken and incomplete OS so you can fix it in the field is no longer acceptable. Ignoring your testers complaints on usability and performance issues will no longer get it done. I suspect that the disaster that was Vista's release is one of the things that caused Apple to reassess their Leopard release date.

With that said, it's obvious that the Vista release cycle was a death march from the get go. There's little chance you can jettison that many major features during the development cycle and still end up with a quality release in the end. Killing cool features also kills developer morale and poor morale causes poor quality.

Re:OSWeekly is wrong

I'm a professional Windows software developer who has been there since Windows 3.0. Windows and Windows APIs are my bread and butter. And you sir, are living in a complete fantasy land.

...the people that 'actually' used Vista for a significant amount of time (i.e. the testers) don't see Vista as the horrible OS that others looking in that haven't used it extensively do.

We beta tested this from alpha to release. It was clunky and busted all along, and it didn't even firm up until the end. Our company still, after dedicating all that effort, will not support running our product on Vista. Which is just as well, since none of our customers, all major financial institutions, are asking for it.

Vista added a lot of architectural changes...

The fact that Vista has revised how its internal subsystems interconnect has had zero impact on the user experience, and your assertation that Vista is faster than XP flies in the face of reality. It is so much slower that we have to reimage all our new computer purchases back to XP because none of our developers will stand to have one on their desk. It literally takes 50% longer to build our entire product tree on Vista than XP. It boggles the mind.

The other big shove Vista has going for it is the migration for development to not only a new set of APIs, but a new concept of development that is as revolutionary as Drag and Drop event based programming made popular with Visual Basic back in 1993.

I'll tell you straight out, no one's going to touch it. No developer in their right mind is going to code to an API that is not backwards compatible to XP. Not going to happen. And in our field of software, financial services, if it doesn't run on W2K, it doesn't ship. Forget shiny, we do not care about shiny. Amateur programmers play with that stuff. Professional programmers code with event horizons of five to ten years. We will not be beta-testing yet another crazy development model from Microsoft. Ask VB6 programmers how well their legacy code bases are doing today. Our company still has mission-critical code written to MFC for God's sake. Do you honestly expect that successful businesses are going to recode their entire product line every time the wind changes in Redmond? We're tired of this crap.

Vista also added enough new features ... more than XP ...more than Leopard, which makes Leopard look like a catch up OS...

Now here, you're just deluding yourself. Vista announced plenty of features and FAILED to deliver on damn near every single one. Off the top of my head, I cannot think of one single feature Vista introduced that was not already available in OSX by the time Vista shipped. WinFS? Didn't happen. Aero? Meet OSX Quartz. Successfully implemented and delivered on time. Full system indexing and searching on Vista is a dog. Ever tried Spotlight on OSX? You don't even it notice it's there. Look at the underlying designs for both and you can see why.

Pick almost any Leopard feature and Vista has the feature, and architecturally there is no 'killer' feature of OS X that Vista cannot implement via 3rd part support.

Which is just another way of saying, Vista has some features and doesn't have the others.

On the other hand Vista has technologies that OS X, Linux, etc don't have yet and won't have for several years.

Name one.

Until OS X or Linux can handle and pre-emptively multi-task GPU operations...

I think if you talk to the Core Video, Core Audio, Core Animation, and Core Whatever-the-heck developers at Apple, you'd find that you're talking out of your ass. As for Linux, who cares. If they cared about that kind of thing, they'd have implemented it.

On Vista you can run several CAD/High End graphical applications under the Aero interface and not lose performance in any of the applicat

Re:OSWeekly is wrong

Not to be a dick, but you 'claim' to be a Windows developer, yet your post is riddled with simple errors...

There were no errors. You choose to make distinctions that more experienced programmers simply gloss over as uninteresting, and I dismissed them out of hand.

that even a novice Windows or novice Vista user would call you out on...

Let them try. I'm on vacation right now, so I can't promise to respond, but given your initial argument, I figure any refutation you bring would be trivially shot down, so I'm content to let other people do the actual research.

I am not going to take time to correct your post...

You should have. That was the only opportunity you had bolster your argument.

I just don't have the time to educate people when they are so mis-informed or intentionally are trying to mislead people.

I'm on vacation, and I just corrected your intentionally misleading post.

You keep referencing OS X as the 'shining' example of a 'good' OS...

I did not, and I do not code to OSX.

Let's take one: You say Aero=Quartz...

Aero and Quartz are popular names for the respective display rendering technologies. You're asking for a level of detail that is irrelevant to the scope of this thread. If we were going to seriously get into it, I'd have you explain how Aero doesn't use double-buffering for 99.9999999% of the windows applications out there today. Then you can explain how any new-fangled application that doesn't answer to WM_PAINT and make GDI calls like the rest of the world can be expected to run on XP. When you're done with that, speculate as to why calling QuickDraw is any different from calling the Win32 GDI. If you honestly believe that Aero takes all those MoveTo, LineTo, FillRect, and DrawText calls and turns them magically into vector graphics, you need to check again.

...and it IS FASTER than XP because Vista smart caches the libraries...

I don't buy it. If the library is on the disk, you still have to load it into memory. If you cache the data so you don't have to load it again, so what, any operating should be able to do that. That's why you have so much RAM, so the file-system can cache pages. If that was a serious issue, we'd put the libraries on a RAM disk.

Superfetch is also why large application like VS or AI open 5-10x faster because it is a 'smart' caching system, and our developers like the fact the applications load and run faster.)

So what you're saying is, you're pre-loading a bunch of stuff, wasting valuable memory in the process, and this is somehow better. How about this instead: provide APIs and technology that makes it possible to write code that doesn't require loading 50MB of dynamic libraries before giving the user control.

All I see is more bloat.

-Hope

Apple has been known to dissemble...

Instead, Leopard wasn't set to be released right near the time of Vista's release, and Apple wasn't going to hurry the process along more than they had to. In fact, we're all now waiting for Leopard's release in October, and this is largely due in part to the need for key members of the OS X team to finish up work on the iPhone so that it could hit store shelves on June 29th.

That's what Apple said, but people who were on the beta were saying that Leopard wasn't likely to be ready on time already, that it was way less stable and mature than Tiger and Panther had been at a similar point. And Apple has been known to dissemble, perhaps not outright fibbing but certainly exaggerating minor issues and not even mentioning major ones... so I still think this explanation should be taken with a pinch of salt.

The column itself says it wasn't a mistake

"With all things considered, did Apple make a serious mistake by delaying Leopard's release until October? I don't think so."

This seems mostly a case of a poorly punctuated column headline. Given the author himself concludes Apple made the right choice in the face of limited resources, a more clear headline would have been "Leopard's Release Date a Serious Mistake?"

Freakish article

What a bizarre article.

His piece is titled:

"Leopard's Release Date a Serious Mistake"

But it closes with the line:

"did Apple make a serious mistake by delaying Leopard's release until October? I don't think so."

So what does it all mean? To me, it means that "OS Weakly" has nothing of substance to say.

This article is a Troll

The author poses a hypothetical question that he knows will get the fanboys riled up: "Did make a mistake?". And the disputes his own question saying "No they didn't". This whole "article" is a troll and should be ignored.

Just the same ol' story...

...which has been re-written ad nauseum for the past six months.

The average mac enthusiast doesn't give a rat's ass about strategic timing of OS releases. If OS 10.5 wasn't ready until now, that's certainly good enough for me.

Missed Opportunity?

They could've taken advantage of Vista's losing streak and one upped Microsoft, the author suggests.

Isn't Apple going to one-up Microsoft next week? I don't recall Vista all the sudden fixing all it's "issues" and becoming a rock-solid everyone-loving OS since the delay was announced.

If anything, Apple scored a coup with the delay, since the amount of pissed-off discouraged Vista users has hit a critical mass.

This guy is clueless

One of the main reasons Vista has been so maligned is because it was ridiculously late and Microsoft was desperate to save face... so they started stripping out promised features and shipped it before it was truly ready. The bad reviews were legion. Word of mouth has spread. Even non-technical people have heard of Vista's bad reputation... I've lost count of the posts I've seen on here where someone mentions their surprise that their mom or whoever remarked something on the order of, "Vista? Isn't that the bad one?"

By holding Leopard back until they were sure it was ready, Apple has laid the groundwork for an even bigger opportunity. There are a lot of people out there who flat out don't like or don't want Vista. Delayed or not, if Leopard gets good reviews in the media and the word of mouth is positive, that's going to give a nice boost to Mac sales.

~Philly

Apple née Computer

I think with the delay of OS X, and the change in name, and the release of the iPhone SDK, Apple has chosen where future growth will lie. They will likely keep making computers, laptop for consumers and towers for pro content creation, but small high profit consumer devices are the future.

If anything, Apple has decided that 5% of the computer market is all it will have, and little it does will displace the PC from corporate, the only way it can get much more than 10%. However, with good consumer toys, it can be the home electronics supplier for those with disposable incomes.

I'd say the timing is perfect.

First of all, it's impossible for Apple to time their releases to coincide with Microsoft's release, since MS was stuck in a cycle of delays that ran about six years. Secondly, Tiger is already more than a match for Vista, and finally, just by sheer luck, Leopard arrives on the scene as people are realizing just how utterly mediocre Vista really is.

-jcr

Apple didn't miss out on anything

Sounds like a fanboy was pissed he couldn't get Leopard back in July. Apple made the right decision by delaying the release of Leopard. Several people on boards I frequent were beta testers and were very vocal in letting everyone know that Leopard was not a "finished" product back then. They would've released something incomplete just like M$; not a good idea. I would say that the only thing Apple lost out on was orders for the new imac/macbooks since many of us were waiting until we were sure that we'd either get Leopard installed or qualify for the updater at a reduced price. I'm definitely happy I bought my new imac at the beginning of October. And yes, it really is that much better than Windows..

Same as it ever was

Apple missed a big opportunity by not releasing Leopard soon.

Yeah, they shoulda released it around 1989, before Windows 3.0 shipped...

Think of all the misery they'd have saved everyone!

RTFA

The article actually makes the opposite conclusion than the title of this post on /.

Quoth the article:

"With all things considered, did Apple make a serious mistake by delaying Leopard's release until October? I don't think so." (emphasis added)

I'd rather they have it right

then early. That alone one ups Vista.

I miss Steve Irwin

Longtime fans of Windows...

The amazing thing is that such a creature still exists in the wild.

Normal users...

...are not like you and me. They'll never try out an OS just to "check it out" like we might when there's a new distro that's supposedly better. The very last thing that Apple wants are Windows users that are finally convinced to switch, then find out that this sucks and has almost as many issues as Windows, only to move back. Not only have you probably lost them for the next 5-10 years, you'll probably get a lot of anti-marketing "Yeah, I tried a Mac a few years ago, it was all overhyped so don't believe them" that'll mean others won't bother at all.

IT geeks haven't got as much marketing power as we think. Oh, I can go on about the advantages of Linux all day but most of them people will think "sure, for him it might work". Vanity works much better, like "Hey Bill could do it, and I'm at *least* as good with computers as him". Same goes the other way around, if you hear someone "like you" giving something a bad review, you'll pay attention. That's just the way it works in all markets, and makes plain old sense. If you want to do print work, you don't read a webdesigner's review of GIMP you read a print worker's review. And with that perspective it makes perfect sense for Apple to wait until it's ready.

One-upped?

According to an article on OSWeekly.com, Apple missed a big opportunity by not releasing Leopard soon. They could've taken advantage of Vista's losing streak and one upped Microsoft, the author suggests.

OSWeekly sounds as if Leopard is the first OS Apple is about to release. Tiger is for most practical purposes just as good OS as Leopard. Leopard is a gradual improvement.

Plus it only is starting to become obvious in the recent 2-3 months how many problems Vista (still) has. The announcement of XP SP3, the oddly early Vista SP1 in Q1 2008, the extended OEM XP support period, the Vista-to-XP downgrade new policy.

And Leopard is here right for the holidays. I'd say, timing is as good as it could be. Perfect-storm-like good.

OSWeekly is just trolling for visits, and we're suckers for it.

Vista's not so bad

I started out as a pre-judged Vista hater. When I got my new laptop (XPS 1330) I decided to give it a go anyway rather than just downgrading to XP. I'm glad - it's actually quite nice, and IMO a real step up from XP unless you have incompatible apps.

Vista's honestly not that bad. Quite nice in some areas. I've had no serious app compat issues - but then I only really use OSS apps, and those tend to be well behaved anyway since they're usually portable, and tend to be quickly updated for new platforms.

I find the UI a small but significant improvement, and I'm already in love with the indexing service's integration with the rest of the OS. Yes, mac users, I know about spotlight - I admin macs at work.

I'd also say that fears about battery life _on_ _new_ _hardware_ with the latest generation of mobile GPUs are somewhat overblown. I don't see a huge difference between Aero on and off - much as I see relatively little difference (1/2 an hour out of this laptops 4 1/2 at most) from activating Compiz on Ubuntu. I'm not even sure there's any effect at all, since whatever difference there is is well within the measurement inaccuracy of any battery testing.

It's not some huge leap forward - it's more like what Apple does between two Mac OS X releases (including the breakage of apps with rather hacky innards that people yell about - try admining a DTP lab with Adobe and Quark products and tell me how much you love Mac OS X updates). What it is, though, is a _lot_ of small and medium improvements rolled up into what I'd call an overall much better OS.

I'd feel pretty ripped off if I'd paid to upgrade from XP - but as a new OS it's quite nice. I don't find the UAC stuff annoying (though it was a HORROR in prereleases apparently) though I do think it's a waste of time that'll just get people clicking the dialogs without even thinking.

As it is, I find Vista much more usable than XP already. It took me a few hours to get used to some of the differences (and I still hate the control panel UI in "new mode" - though I'm sure it's OK for non-technical users) but it's now quite nice to use. I tend to switch between it and Ubuntu on my new laptop, depending on task.

Re:That depends.

horrific adjective

see Windows Me

Re:Author is clueless

People that buy apple products aren't technical enough to know if leopard is better than any past build revision of FreeBSD that apple leeched. They buy apple because it looks cute and they can remain oblivious to technology. The author is a clueless monkey if he thinks people suddenly want to buy apple crap because it's build 10.3.1.

That's a comment that makes sense only to someone who's entire OS life is spent underneath a command prompt. FreeBSD while an important part of X is only part of the foundation. It's everything else that's on top and underneath that makes the OS something other than a gearhead toy. And since when is making use of Open Source some sort of moral crime? Apple makes it's acknowledgements and last time I checked it's changes are open sourced back in the form of Darwin. Have you tried Darwin and made any real comparison? Or are you just some Linux Nazi who is lashing out with unsubstantive bile for the simple reason that it's not Linux. If so, you're no different than Mac Nazis, or Windows Nazis, or Amiga Zombies that still think there's a future for that last platform, you're acting from unreason.

Re:Apple needs to come out with 10.5 of all system

I agree completely, at least with the last part of your comment. Right now Apple has a product for every part of the market *except* the market that most home consumers are in. Consider that Dell sells a number of machines aimed at a home market that run for between $400 and $1000 for a complete system. Apple has absolutely nothing in that price rance except the Mac Mini, which is hardly a capable machine with its slow hard drive. Apple badly needs a small tour unit that can come to between $800 and $1000 with a monitor! Until then they are missing out on a huge market that thinks the iMac is too expensive for them, and the Mac Mini isn't enough computer. And actually the Mac Mini is really expensive too, for what it is. No keybard, no mouse, no monitor, all for about $500-$600. I'm the first to say that when you compare laptops, or even iMacs to business workstations, Apple is the same price or cheaper. But not so for the home market, one dominated by cheap whitebox PCs and Dells. I'm not going to suggest that Apple sell OS X for non-Apple harware. Just that Apple needs to start addressing the needs of this market in terms of hardware. I know of half a dozen close friends and relatives who would have bought Apple had Apple actually had something available.