Apple Sets Oct. 24th Release For Mac OS X 10.3 696
dricci writes "Yahoo! has posted a press release from Apple, regarding the release date of the next major Mac OS X update, 10.3 ('Panther'). The update will be available 8:00 p.m. on October 24th at Apple Retail Stores and Authorized Resellers for $129.00 US (Family Pack for up to 5 users will be $199). Pretty much the same pricing structure they had for Jaguar. It looks like 'old world' Beige G3 support has been discontinued -- the update requires a Mac with built in USB."
Re:rediculous (Score:5, Insightful)
Worth it. (Score:5, Insightful)
Hooray!! (Score:2, Insightful)
Jeff
Business Model? (Score:0, Insightful)
Is this a sucessful business model? Put out a new OS every year? Sorry, I should say an "upgrade" every year, and charge users $129 every time? Yes, I know that Apple offers updates periodically throughout the year as errors pop-up, and does not charge for them. Though, as costly as the hardware to run it is, somehow I don't know that this works. Perhaps this explains why Apple is relagated to a somewhat niche market. (Read: Education (though less now than before), Graphics Design, Desktop Publishing, some Web Design, and some Music. (Sorry if I missed any.)) This may also be why businesses are willing to put up with Microsoft's flaws, and are now looking to Open Source. (No not OS X!, OS X is only slightly open source. But that's an argument for another time and another post.)
Re:no 'cheap' upgrade for purchases prior to Oct 8 (Score:2, Insightful)
However, I can see there will be a lot of new 12", 15" and 17" 'Alu' Powerbook owners that will feel they have been shafted having bought the new revised machines at the start of October...
Sucks if you just bought a new powerbook (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Panther (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, they might try. It'll probably be a pale imitation, just like with everything else that Microsoft has copied of Apple's.
Regardless, there's a precedent that Apple has set, that MS hasn't been able to follow (and, IMO, won't ever be able to): that is, with every new OS release, your computer gets faster.
-- james
Re:rediculous (Score:3, Insightful)
And, if we use the MS argument against Linux, unless your time and bandwidth is worthless, you do pay or every incremental upgrade.
Re:Countdown clock (Score:5, Insightful)
Run an OS 10.0.4 box along side of a 10.1.0 box or a 10.0.4 along side a 10.2.0 box and then do a file copy or a browse to a network server and fart around with the machine at the sametime.
Or fire up IE and browse
The OS does get *that* much faster.
Re:MacOS 10.3 (Score:5, Insightful)
Two fallacies in one post - way to go.
Fallacy one. How many different word processing/spreadsheet/paint packages do you use ? how many does anyone need? There's a slection of the best from free to costly available on the Mac. Some of the best aren't available on Windows...
Fallacy two. OSX (and Linux and Unix) aren't just more secure because not so many people hack them - they're more secure because they're built that way. They don't by default execute attachments when you read email, they don't leave ports open all over the place etc etc. OSX has fewer security problems because its built that way and Windoh!s isn't. Edward
is it so hard to use the CLI FTP client? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Countdown clock (Score:5, Insightful)
It's been done. Witness the perennial Linux v. GNU/Linux debates.
Enough with the "point" release (Score:5, Insightful)
I will stipulate that Apple went ahead and violated a convention in computing for the sake of marketing; but people criticizing the $129 price in the context of the upgrade being a "point" release are way off the mark.
Panther is OS XII -- but I guess Apple wants to stick with the mindshare that the big "X" has created.
I stuck with 10.1 until only last month. Know what? When I finally installed Jaguar on my machine, I was kicking myself for waiting so long.
These are major upgrades.
Re:Panther (Score:5, Insightful)
This is usually a sign of good software engineering: make it right first, then make it fast. It's difficult to make bad software faster since it is a challenge to get it work acceptably and changes have too many consequences.
That said, MS probably doesn't care about older machines. Most people don't upgrade their MS operating systems, they buy new ones bundled with new machines. This allows the MS engineers to focus on features that will help MS in its business plans. So, when you get your new machine, with a few exceptions it feels pretty much the same speed as the old one, but has lots of spiffy new features. The folks still using 90MHz Pentiums are not the people who spend much money on IT, and therefore they can do without or suffer horrible performance. It doesn't make for a product one admires on a technical level, but it's hard to fault the business strategy.
Apple's approach makes sense too though, considering their niche position. People buy the latest Macs because they must have them, and roll down their old Macs to other folks. Improving the experience of folks with the hand-me-downs probably helps create the next generation of converts who will shell out money every year to year and a half out of pure technological lust.
Re:Panther (Score:1, Insightful)
A cynical person might say that that's the result of Apple setting a precedent of their new OS releases not being very good.
System 6 to 7 wasn't faster. I don't recall 9 feeling faster than 8. And surely you wouldn't say 10.0 was faster than 9?
So I think what you really meant to say was: I'm disappointed that 10.0 and 10.1 were so bad, and now Apple looks like they'll release something reasonably fast, which is just as well because their machines are just a little slow and I can't afford to pay top dollar for the biggest and best.
Quite a mouthful, that. So I understand why you stuck with your original comment. No worries.
Re:Enough with the "point" release (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Old World Support (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, man! Fight the power! I want to run the latest and greatest OS on my six year old computer! Even though I bought into the proprietary platform, knowing full well that Apple goes through hardware generations and OSes every 3-5 years! For the past 15+ years!
No more Apple screwing us over! I want OS 10.4 to support my Mac SE! I put 4 megs of RAM and an ethernet card in that thing... it cost me a bundle in 1989! I want some return on that investment! Damn Apple for screwing the user!
Re:Hooray!! (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Enough with the "point" release (Score:3, Insightful)
The X in OS X is a word play. It has a double meaning. It means 10 in Roman numerals, thus signifying the next big release after OS 9, and a revolutionary release. It is also an X as in uniX and advertises that OS X is a uniX operating system. There's more to the name than just changing to a Roman numeral numbering scheme.
OS X is the name of the operating system. The number afterward is the version.
Could they have gone with OS X 1.0? Yeah, and I think that would have been better, but, I'm not paid by Apple to make the big decisions.
Re:Hey, that's my birthday! (Score:5, Insightful)
Another nice thing: No product activation.
Re:Bastards! (Score:2, Insightful)
Customers who purchase a qualifying new Power Mac G5 (M9020LL/A, M9031LL/A, M9032LL/A) regardless of purchase date that does not have Mac OS X Panther v10.3 included can upgrade to Mac OS X Panther.
Check your facts before complaining.
Re:Sounds like a letdown? (Score:5, Insightful)
Regardless, 10.2.8, as mentioned earlier, is free. And there are some significant things that make this worth the upgrade.
A lot of things have been sped up/optimized. PDF viewing, file searches, graphics in general.
The file system is fully journaled.
File Vault provides full 128-bit encryption of user files - with no or little speed degradation. A very handy feature for people with laptops that might possibly get stolen.
All the Samba stuff works much better.
iChat AV. I video call my relatives on the west coast and this is a billion times better than the phone; I don't care if people think it's cheesy or not.
X11 is a lot tighter than in previous versions.
etc.., etc.., etc..
As far as the G5 goes, what other PC, PC mind you, can you have 8-gigs of ram on or that comes stock wither SATA drives?! None yet. Apple is doing it right. They're introducing things that work well and will then provide incremental upgrades that bring in tested features, such as 64-bit. I think a lot of people are just too used to the Windoze way of release crap asap and then fix. Charging along the way as well.
Re:rediculous...it's spelled ridiculous & U R (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:X11 (Score:2, Insightful)
It's Mac OS X 3.0 (Score:3, Insightful)
For technical reasons, Apple chose to go with a more conservative numbering scheme. The problem seems to be that buyers put way too much emphasis on the version number. For example, 10.2 brought Quartz Extreme, which was a massive leap for the graphics engine. This isn't something you'd typically find in a point release. These are major new features that require serious engineering.
Mac OS X 10.3 is actually Mac OS X 3.0. In fact, I have an early Mac OS X packing list that reads "Mac OS X 1.0", but they've since changed it to Mac OS X 10.0. Apple tried to address the point release stigma using "Jaguar" and "Panther", but there's still some confusion.
The bizarre dilemma Apple finds themselves in is that they've created this incredibly flexible architecture that allows them to make sweeping improvements very quickly, but it happens so fast that people don't think it's real. You can't win.
As for needing Panther to run future applications, yes, of course. Apple buffs up the frameworks, so better applications will result from the framework enhancements. The alternative is to just sit around and let other OS architectures catch up while not selling a new product. I don't think the advantages of this outweight the disadvantages at this point.
- Scott