Mac OS X Mountain Lion Gets Three Million Downloads In 4 Days 397
hypnosec writes "Apple has announced that its latest Mac OS X version, Mountain Lion, has had three million downloads in just four days thereby making it the most successful OS in Cupertino's history. Philip Schiller, iPhone maker's senior vice president of Worldwide Marketing, said, 'Just a year after the incredibly successful introduction of Lion, customers have downloaded Mountain Lion over three million times in just four days, making it our most successful release ever.'"
Sounds impressive, but how many are paid.. (Score:2)
All of them (Score:2, Redundant)
I have to wonder how many of these are people that received a free upgrade with their new Macintoshes... /didn't rtfm
Maybe you should have:
Philip Schiller, iPhone maker’s senior vice president of Worldwide Marketing, said, “Just a year after the incredibly successful introduction of Lion, customers have downloaded Mountain Lion over three million times in just four days, making it our most successful release ever.”
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, and everyone who bought mac in the last few months had it ship with lion, but was entitled to upgrade and download mountain lion for FREE.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, and everyone who bought mac in the last few months had it ship with lion, but was entitled to upgrade and download mountain lion for FREE.
You're right. I withdraw my previous objection.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:All of them (Score:5, Informative)
You don't need a tool. If you open up the package that comes with mountain lion there is a file which is mountable / burnable as a stand alone installer. Very typical of Apple: hard enough to stop people who don't know what they are doing from shooting themselves in the foot, easy enough that if you do know what you are doing you can make your install media.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure how your quote confirms or refutes what he said. It sounds like you think he thinks there was a DVD in a package of recent purchases.
Purchasers of a new machine on or after June 11 do get a free upgrade to Mountain Lion. I don't know if those are counted in these numbers.
Re: (Score:2)
Possibly fewer than you'd think... Apple actually made claiming the free update hard enough that I'm considering just paying the $20.
Re: (Score:3)
Hard to claim?
Click on link on Apple homepage. Fill in contact info and serial number (Apple Menu->About This Mac.... copy/paste). Click submit.
A day or two later, get an email with a redemption code for the App store.
Input redemption code, click install.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes on the day of release most people either couldn't get a code or Apple was sending out duplicate codes that other people had already redeemed.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't forget the step of finding your proof of purchase, scanning it and uploading it.
I agree, it's not hard in the sense that solving global warming is hard, but given that I bought it through work and have to track down whatever purchasing drone can provide proof of purchase, and then have to find a scanner, and then have to find (again) the link to that web page (where I already filled in the whole form before getting to the point where I discovered I needed the scan of the proof of purchase), it's looki
Re: (Score:3)
As with some online rebate redemptions - the system will pick random submissions for additional verification in order to verify that the people applying for the rebate are those intended to get said rebate. Otherwise, they would have to hire dozens of temps to go through millions of submissions of physical articles they'd have to track and ultimately dispose of to handle the rebate. 24-72 hours for the former method, 6-8 weeks (if your lucky) for the other.
Re: (Score:2)
I got one of those, and about 20 minutes later another email with the corrected codes.
Re: (Score:2)
Just confirming what the AC said here as another person who got the free upgrade.
Ok... but why? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Ok... but why? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Ok... but why? (Score:5, Informative)
It was the killer feature for my son as well. But then he found out Airplay mirroring isn't supported on his 2010 MacBook Pro. He's a little pissed at Apple. I figure he's getting a lesson in tech obsolescence. I'm happy - Airplay mirroring works great on my 2012 Air. :-)
If he's techy at all, tell him why.
You can't send HD resolution video across WiFi (or even Gigabit Ethernet) uncompressed, so AirPlay mirroring requires compression. AppleTV hardware only supports the H.264 codec, so the format has to be H.264. While it's very efficient in terms of compression ratio, it's also very difficult to implement in software -- as in, it probably takes almost all of a quadcore CPU's cycles to encode 1080p in realtime. Since that would be pointless (you want to use your computer normally while mirroring, not have its fans howling just to send its display to the TV), Apple requires hardware H.264 encoding to implement AirPlay mirroring.
On Macs, that hardware is the QuickSync H.264 encoder / decoder block. QuickSync is a feature of Intel HD 3000 (or better) video, introduced in codename "Sandy Bridge" CPU models (aka "second generation Core i3/i5/i7"). Earlier Intel CPUs didn't have a hardware H.264 encoder. Sandy Bridge CPUs first shipped in 2011 Macs, so 2010 Macs cannot support AirPlay mirroring -- they do not have the required hardware.
Re: (Score:3)
This would be a decent reason if the source material was uncompressed HD video.
However, it almost certainly is not. It's ridiculous (for multiple reasons) that if you have an existing H.264 encoded file, you need a Mac capable of realtime H.264 encoding to stream it to an AppleTV.
If it is a H.264 encoded file, you can stream it directly from iTunes already. The new feature [apple.com] does full screen mirroring - perfect for streaming those services who are desktop only (Hulu and other flash players). There is a non-apple solution [airparrot.com] with some some technical trade offs [cultofmac.com] if you have an older Mac or a Windows system.
Re: (Score:2)
What feature is it that people are after?
I waited a couple of days, to check that there were no obvious glitches on loading, and then went for it — I wanted it for one thing only, really, and that was a bug fix: faster logging in after opening the screen / coming out from sleep/hibernation/whatever it is.
Re: (Score:3)
For me, it was the AirPlay Mirroring, which lets me stream my desktop in 1080p with audio from my Mac to my Apple TV in a different room. I had in the past looked into getting a dedicated "wireless HDMI" device, but that tends to run into the hundreds very quickly.
Other than that, they added iCloud, Notification Center, Reminders, and a lot of other niceties from iOS. For the new features, Gatekeeper is getting the most press probably, and while I find the trend that it might be indicative of to be a fright
Re: (Score:3)
Well, with good reason, because people fear that the "Anywhere" optoin can be removed at any time.
Which is very unlikely for many reasons.
First
Re:Ok... but why? (Score:5, Informative)
The real killer feature is that ML is faster than Lion and runs better on systems with less than 4 GB of RAM.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
"runs better on systems with less than 4G of RAM"
Tempted to add my own remarks but this kind of speaks for itself.
Re: (Score:3)
"runs better on systems with less than 4G of RAM"
Tempted to add my own remarks but this kind of speaks for itself.
So which is it? Bash Apple for leaving usable hardware behind with forced obsolescence, or bash Apple for improving performance on older machines?
You have to pick one troll direction and stick to it or you look wishy washy. I've seen you do better.
Depends on Why... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
There are also more people alive in the world since XP.
I hope Windows 8 isn't as bad as Vista was.
Re:Depends on Why... (Score:4, Interesting)
You're absolutely correct. And I think the fact that it was a painless upgrade through their App store made it so quick for adoption.
Compare to Microsoft's download options for Win7 where you had to find which online store you could actually purchase a download from, then download the disc image, find and download another app to turn that into something you could boot from, reboot the machine, and pray things would choke during the reformat. Not to mention the multiple price points and versions.
The Mountain Lion upgrade on the other hand was:
1) Open App store.
2) Click install next the Mountain Lion.
3) Pay $20 (or redeem an install code between steps 1 and 2)
4) After download completes, launch the App from you Applications Folder
5) Click ok, ok, agree, ok
6) Wait for restart.
Easiest OS upgrade I have ever seen. Even Windows service packs are more complicated.
Re:Apple (Score:5, Interesting)
I was *so* impressed with Apple years ago. My wife had an older OS/X laptop and had just bought a new one. The old one was running when she booted up the new one and during the setup process (all of about 3 minutes to be on the web), it popped up a dialog stating it noticed another laptop was running nearby and would we like to transfer the user settings and data from that machine to this one? Click yes and it was done in no time.
After years of fucking around with Windows systems, it was a joy to see something like that done right. Actually, thats the way I think of OS/X mostly - it works the way I want it to most of the time, and the rest of the time I pay it no attention because its not malfunctioning. I readily admit MS has made great leaps and bounds between Win7 and WinXP, but its still not as polished.
Re:Depends on Why... (Score:4, Informative)
In Linux, the equivilent of the registery is stored in the users $HOME under hidden directories. I haven't got into that level with OS/X on my new Mac yet, but since it is Unix, it is probably done the same way.
So when I got tired of messing with Unity on Ubunu, I deleted the O/S partition and installed Linux Mint. Imagine my suprise when after booting it for the first time, not only did I have my desktop settings and icons, but Firefox even remembered my last opened tabs!
Re:Depends on Why... (Score:4, Insightful)
I know that reading is hard, but Phil Schiller said "Just a year after the incredibly successful introduction of Lion, customers have downloaded Mountain Lion over three million times in just four days, making it our most successful release ever."
No one made a direct comparison between Mountain Lion's sales and Windows 7's sales, until you just did right before disproving it. This is what we call a classic straw man argument.
.. in other news ... (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
Cute.
Whether it was being downloaded by bots or humans, this story was interesting to me from a distributed payload distribution angle. At 4.1Gb a copy, that many Mountain Lions comes out to over 12 petabytes transferred in under four days. That had potential to clog up Ted Stevens' series of tubes, but I've not heard of any problems.
Re: (Score:3)
Well, if you do the math....
4 days = 345600 seconds
4,100 MB * 4 million = 16,400,000,000 MB
Converting to Mb for bandwidth purposes = 131,200,000,000 Mb
That would average to 379,629 Mb/s, or 370Gb/s
Well, that is still impressive. I'm sure they were serving it off of tens of thousands of machines, spread across many CDN nodes, which would have lowered the impact on the Internet at large.
I just wouldn't want to see their data services bill. :) I'm sure a few someones got filthy rich off of that.
what no official torrent??? (Score:2, Interesting)
Other ways than torrents to save bandwidth (Score:5, Informative)
would have saved them quite a bit of bandwidth
So does Akamai, which is what Apple uses.
Why not? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Why not? Because Mountain Lion 1) won't run on almost all my Macs, 2) it removed the SAVE AS choice, 3) the main goal of Mountain Lion appears to be to corral software developers into using Apple's App Store for all sales.
Not quite right... it was Lion 10.7 that removed "Save As..."
Other people have listed some compelling reasons that they installed Mountain Lion but you list two, including grousing about your archaic Macs.
If you are going to take the time to type, giving something worthwhile to think about, eh.
Anonymous Cowards is funny peoples.
2007 Mac Mini couldn't be upgraded (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I was a bit surprised that 5 year old equipment just isn't worth it to Apple to support.
Why were you surprised? They don't support my G4 PowerMac anymore, either.
At what point, exactly, might you cease to be surprised?
Re: (Score:3)
Apple is the poster child for locked in environments, less user choice, aggressive tactics to get users to upgrade as often and as frequently as possible... etc...
Because Apple profits off of both the OS and the hardware, they have a very strong incentive to
Re: (Score:3)
Never? Windows 8 will run on a 10yr old computer.
Only (some) 10 year old computers that have since had upgrades. The oldest Intel processors that W8 will support had just come out and the earliest AMD processors were 2003. And it would be a damn rare thing to find a 2002 graphics card that meets W8 support requirements.
So, yes, if you bought the most expensive computer possible a decade ago and continued to upgrade its RAM and Video Card it would now run W8 at a minimal level.
If you bought anything but the very cheapest models OSX 10.8 is good back to 200
Re: (Score:3)
So the entry-point machine from 5 years ago doesn't run the latest and greatest? Big surprise.
My 2007 Macbook Pro will run Mountain Lion just fine.
I challenge you to find a $600 PC from 2004 that would run Windows7 when it launched in 2009. You can even ignore 64bit Win7 and just focus on Win7 32bit Home Basic if you want. (As you yourself said, Mountain Lion is exclusively 64bit).
Re:2007 Mac Mini couldn't be upgraded (Score:4, Informative)
I have a Sempron 2600+ (64-bit too!) machine I assembled back in 2004. It runs Windows 7 just fine.
Re:2007 Mac Mini couldn't be upgraded (Score:4, Informative)
Why did she not simply re-install Snow Leopard?
There's no reason she had to upgrade any of that...
Re:Actual title should be (Score:5, Funny)
"Just a year after the incredibly successful introduction of Lion, customers have downloaded Mountain Lion over three million times in just four days, making it our most successful release ever."
or?
We were all very eager for a path forward that offered fixes and completion for Lion's half-realized and sometimes infuriating design / implementation choices. :-)
Re:Actual title should be (Score:4, Funny)
We were all very eager for a path forward that offered fixes and completion for Lion's half-realized and sometimes infuriating design / implementation choices. :-)
Ah, yes. Going forward, I propose that we call this the "Windows Vista Hangover effect."
Re:Actual title should be (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't know about the 2999999 other sheep, but i will be upgrading my laptop from snow leopard to mountain lion indeed. I liked some features in Lion, but they sounded like they needed improvement. Mountain Lion may be it.
Also, it's cheap.
Re:Actual title should be (Score:5, Interesting)
FileVault2 is worthwhile.
So is multi-destination Time Machine.
There's a bunch of better integrations to iCloud - which are interesting - and make Time Machine less valuable, at the same time. ;-)
The other cloud/SaaS plugin services are no use to me, as I don't Twit, etc.
I like airplay mirroring. It makes my 1080p TV a big display via Apple TV - without cabling.
Re: (Score:2)
Multi-destination Time Machine?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
A lot of the house-keeping of multiple destination was left to the user. If you want round-robin or first available, etc.? You'd make this manually. But HEY! Time Machine is automatic, right? There is a plethora of AppleScript and even Cocoa Apps to manage this. These are pretty much obsoleted.
I'll defer to the Ars Technica description [arstechnica.com]:
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Actual title should be (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Actual title should be (Score:5, Insightful)
I hear there's actually a few competing products for your operating system money that do just that. In fact, it's safe to say that limited power user oriented features have been one of the chief complaints with apple operating systems for years.
Re: (Score:3)
Truly Powerful Users have the Terminal, BASH and Apple scripting, C/C++ and Java compilers, etc etc. I often rename files in my ever-open iTerm, since it is often much faster than using a GUI - the real beauty of a 17" MacBook Pro is the resolution (and multi-monitors) allow you to have so many xterms open at once :)
The Mac is at least as good as Linux for almost all of this (I say this after starting to use Linux a little in 1992 onward and heavily in 1996 to present). Hence, our office of Java develop
Re: (Score:2)
"Just a year after the incredibly successful introduction of Lion, customers have downloaded Mountain Lion over three million times in just four days, making it our most successful release ever."
or?
We were all very eager for a path forward that offered fixes and completion for Lion's half-realized and sometimes infuriating design / implementation choices. :-)
I'll take that over Microsoft's Vista, which took 5 years to arrive after XP landed. Even at its longest, Apple has never left their users without an OS update for more than 2.5 years (Tiger - during which they added support for Intel processors).
Re: (Score:2)
you are aware -why- there was such a gap between xp and vista, right?
or are you just poking MS with a stick to amuse yourself?
Re:Actual title should be (Score:5, Funny)
...just poking MS with a stick to amuse yourself?
It's the simple things that make you smile.
Re: (Score:3)
> you are aware -why- there was such a gap between xp and vista, right?
You should measure gaps between final releases, not a release and a beta.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Haterade Addicts get Another Opportunity to Bitch About Apple!
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
This discussion thread brought to you by Slashdot, proud sponsor of the 2012 Smartphone OS Flame War.
Re:Actual title should be (Score:5, Insightful)
Can't agree more. /. is becoming a joke as a 'news for nerds' site. They turn into the trollfest we see above. Every single post above is flamebait.
The fact that OS X broke out of the marginal OS arena is good news for any non-windows platform, regardless of who makes it. It's also of interest to the enterprise crowd looking for alternatives to Windows 8, and not only due to the fact that this happens to be OS X but also because they may look at other alternatives if Windows grip on the computer market isn't rock solid.
Re: (Score:2)
I would have tried OSX ages ago, if only Apple let me install it on hardware I already owned instead of purchasing new hardware which is spec'd damn near the same as what I've already got.
yes I'm aware of hackintosh'ing your machine. just seems like too much of a hassle.
I did try the OS in a VM. it was alright, but you can only learn so much about an OS from a VM. you've got to actually live with it a few months to really know what it's like.
Re:Actual title should be (Score:5, Insightful)
I would have tried OSX ages ago, if only Apple let me install it on hardware I already owned instead of purchasing new hardware which is spec'd damn near the same as what I've already got.
I would have tried Black Berry OS 10 if only RIM would let me use it on iPhone. Huh?
Apple is not Microsoft, they do not sell operating systems. If you are unwilling to buy an Apple then why would they care if you try OSX?
Re: (Score:3)
I don't know if it does limit their OS sales. Lots of people do sell operating systems only. And OpenStep which was essentially an earlier version of OS X was available. People didn't buy OpenStep. Mac OS X Server 1.0 was the first version of OSX available only for Apple hardware and sales have been much much better since they stopped selling OSes.
Re: (Score:3)
Before I bought my iMac I did look at Windows machines, and a similarly specced Dell XPS with an IPS 2048x1536 screen would've cost a whopping 25GBP less, would have had a much more annoying OS on it and would not have been so easy to carry up and down stairs. So I wasted the extra 25GBP on an iMac. You only find a similar specced machine for less if you have a shit screen. I quite fancied not having a shit screen for a change.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Why Apple? This has very little to do with Apple actually. This is more about a lame tech press that treats every Apple press release like something that's going to win them a Pulizter.
"Apple sees record downloads after it pushes users to downloads"
That's not news, that's the kind of math that PolySci professors think you don't need to learn.
But the big question... (Score:2)
Who'll be first to get it to run on an x86 Surface tablet?
At $99 fire sale prices, those would be pretty decent with Lion added.
Zoom the menus for touch with the magnify routines the dock uses?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I thought we all agreed that a desktop OS was a terrible idea on a tablet. OSX doesn't even have the touch amenities that Windows 7 does.
I'm not talking a commercial product, just a hack that would be interesting to see. Certainly the desktop OSes won't scale down to smartphones well. But I suspect that whatever experiments Steve passed over in the labs would still be interesting, and probably more fun/functional than what the other guys will ship. Access to OS X apps on something that wouldn't get used otherwise would be a fun twist.
Apple has done quite a bit with multi-touch. They could likely apply it in new places, maybe toggling it
Re:But the big question... (Score:5, Insightful)
You must be joking... Steve Jobs spent more than half a decade to design an OS from the ground up (UI wise) to make it useable on a tablet, and you think, citing Jobs, it would be a good idea to bring Jobs's other OS to a tablet?
I honestly cannot think of anything more ridiculous. That's basically what Microsoft tried before the iPad which failed so miserably that everyone forgot tablets existed before the iPad.
You're looking for a job? Try applying to the CEO position of Miscrosoft. You seem to be as smart as he is.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
All Apple users are fanboys/girls. You just become one after having used such marvellously perfect hardware and software for a while. Face it: there is nothing better!
Re: (Score:2)
Really mods? Obvious flamebait is being marked as +1?
The only thing slashdot has going for it is the dialoge and once you start elevating comments like this, you do a disservice to the entire community. I stopped reading Digg for this very reason.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The Apple community isn't like the Windows community. A very large percentage of the userbase does every OS upgrade, and that was true even when they charged $129 for them. Developers are allowed to force the issue, for example there are many applications which require 10.7.3 Feb 1, 2012 release) or newer already. At the same time software buyers expect support very quickly. Pretty much everyone is going to 10.8 over the next few years and probably 80% of the user base this year.
I'm not sure why how man
Re: (Score:3)
http://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=10&qpcustomd=0&qpcustomb=*1 [netmarketshare.com]
Take a simple example: OSX share June 2012.
10.4 3%
10.5 (Oct 2007) 12%
10.6 (Aug 2009) 38%
10.7 (July 2011) 47%
Conversely on Windows
XP 47%
Vista (Jan 2007) 7%
Windows 7 (July 2009) 45%
In other words almost 1/2 of all Mac users had upgraded their OS within the last 11 mo. 10.6 and Windows 7 are about the same age 85% of Mac users were that far updates as contrasted with 45% of windows users. Almost 1/2 of W
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not familiar with Waterworld?
This is Slashdot, not your grandma's sewing circle.
Re: (Score:3)
The average Sales Man often gets the title of VP of sales. Because they need to work with the other companies higher ups, having a VP in their title makes them seem important, not just a normal sales guy.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Where I work people can enter their own job titles on the internal 'phone book' on the intranet.
As you can imagine everyone is senior this, senior that etc ... except for one of the sysadmins in India who is the 'Most Senior Systems Administrator'
Re:senior vice president of Worldwide Marketing (Score:5, Funny)
I wish we had that. I'd be High Potentate And Head Muckety Muck.
No, wait... SENIOR High Potentate And Head Muckety Muck.
Re:senior vice president of Worldwide Marketing (Score:5, Informative)
He answers only to the CEO, as do all senior VP's. There are just nine of these guys [apple.com] and they're each responsible for a fundamental aspect of Apple's operation.
I agree most corporate titles are complete bullshit, and I'm sure there are also lots of these folks running around at Apple Inc. But imho Apple's Senior VPs aren't really part of that nonsense as their titles actually show their responsibility and function pretty well.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Nine for Mortal Men doomed to die, One for the Dark Lord on his dark throne...
Ooooerrrr! Jony Ive must have made them out of Aluminium, maybe Titanium for the Tim Cook's One!
Re: (Score:2)
could be that the guy has a dozen people working under him with titles like VP of north american marketing, VP of central american marketing, VP of defending our IP from the chinese, VP of middle eastern marketing, etc.
he's "worldwide" cause he's in charge of all the smaller "wides"?
Re:senior vice president of Worldwide Marketing (Score:4, Funny)
VP of middle eastern marketing,
Read this as "VP of middle earth marketing."
One veep to rule them all,
One veep to find them,
One veep to sell them all and with an iPad blind them,
Re: (Score:3)
Many manufacturers sell items to foreign markets, but only wholesale, and leave the marketing to the retailers or importers, in which case a "Marketing" guy is actually going to have a very different job description than a "worldwide marketing" guy.
Also Phil probably has the title in his contract.
Re: (Score:2)
They probably just ran out of new terms to use, so they strung more and more existing ones together till it sounded good.
Reminds me of way back when, ATI (pre-AMD) released the following series of video cards:
Graphics Ultra
Graphics Ultra Pro
Graphics Ultra Pro Turbo
I was really hoping they would release a Graphics Ultra Pro Turbo Pro Pro Ultra (maybe with 'Mongoose' thrown in somewhere), but they ended up releasing a new processor and the names went a different direction.
Re: (Score:2)
Reminds me of Super Street Fighter II, Turbo Champion Hyper Fighting Edition madness from the 90s.
pretty sure at least one of those editions only added extra colorshift palates.
Re: (Score:2)
Breaking news: Tech blogs covering release of operating system that every single member of their readership may not be using. "Industry relevance" cited.
Re: (Score:3)
Good on you, Apple and all those who live in glass and stainless steel houses who can afford to keep buying the beautiful and sleek Apple hardware on which to run Mountain Lion....
Hmmm. I'm reading your gibberish on a used $400 iMac that can certainly run Mountain Lion.
Re: (Score:2)
If you are a typical professional software developer and your OSX machine saves you five minutes every day in time and frustration compared to a similar Windows system, then the added price of the OSX machine will pay for itself in less than a year.
If you are a typical software developer the above doesn't happen because why would you develop on an OSX machine when you're not developing for the OSX platform?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
of course I'm not addressing where the magical five minutes is coming from either, just making a point about 'typical' developers
Re: (Score:2)
Five whole minutes eh? That's like change in the couch cushions. There are so many other things that could waste 5 minutes (or even longer) in your average work day that it hardly seems worthwhile to bother with.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Who cares about Apple OS's? The whole company sucks and so do their overpriced products. I hear it sucks ass to work at Apple. Its very cutthroat and the company that makes their hardware, Foxconn, literally has nets outside the windows to save would-be jumpers from committing suicide.
The jealousy. The utter jealousy.
Re: (Score:2)
Who cares about Apple OS's? The whole company sucks and so do their overpriced products.
Quantify this, please.
Re: (Score:3)
Who cares about Apple OS's?
139 comments and counting.