The whole OSX version vs. Windows "versions" and cost argument is stupid. Each has it's own qualities and costs and to argue that one is "overpriced" or "stupid" to have so many versions is just short sighted. If you can't understand tiered functionality/pricing, then don't talk about it.
If I don't want to pay extra for functions I don't need, then I won't, and I'm glad Microsoft gives me that option, unlike Apple.
The US and EU would be so far up Microsoft's ass if consumers were forced to purchase stuff like AD connectivity, even if the price was reduced. The editions aren't a choice.
Funny. OSX (and Linux IIRC) can connect to Active Directory out of the box. The ability to connect to a server is nothing like bundling IE. It's not like anyone has forced MS to remove Explorer, anyway.
And I'm sure Apple would be raked over the coals for having an all-inclusive version if they'd been convicted of abusing a monopoly a decade or so ago. If they did, I still wouldn't understand complaints about having three or four editions visible to consumers.
The whole OSX version vs. Windows "versions" and cost argument is stupid. Each has it's own qualities and costs and to argue that one is "overpriced" or "stupid" to have so many versions is just short sighted. If you can't understand tiered functionality/pricing, then don't talk about it.
If I don't want to pay extra for functions I don't need, then I won't, and I'm glad Microsoft gives me that option, unlike Apple.
Oh, I can understand it. The way they've defined their tiers is bizarre and pointless and elements of basic functionality got shuffled out of the reasonable person edition of the OS to bulk up the super extra ridiculous edition's list of exclusive features. A number of pointless and just plain odd differences were inserted and that's stupid.
And don't think for a second that you're paying "less" because you got the lower end version, they started at that price point and then moved upwards from there. It makes no sense when pricing tiers to start at the tier that represents the amount you've decided that you need to make, and then offer less expensive versions. You start with what you need to make and add additional, more expensive versions and then invent justifications for users to buy them. You can either pay what they wanted you to pay, or you can pay them bonus dollars for the whole thing.
Not to mention that the upgrade from XP to Vista is preeeeeetty incremental. There's not much in Vista that gives you a real reason to upgrade other than XP being no longer supported and unavailable for purchase. Every time OS X comes out with an upgrade I can find at least a handful of compelling reasons to go ahead with it.
Pheezer on
IT'S GOT ME REACHING IN MY POCKET IT'S GOT ME FORKING OVER CASH
CUZ THERE'S SOMETHING IN THE MIDDLE AND IT'S GIVING ME A RASH
I bought a MacBook Pro in September 2007. Actually I bought it in August 2007 but it took five weeks to deliver. In February, the cable connecting the display to the system board broke. Green lines appeared on the screen and it would intermittently go black. This necessitated replacement of the entire lid under warranty, which took a week and would have cost $800 if the problem had developed out of warranty.
A month later the fans failed. The machine would overheat and freeze and a strange noise was emitted from below the keyboard. I again had to fix the laptop under warranty, but fortunately this only took about half an hour to do.
In June, the battery died. It would only charge up to about 50%, and the thing would just shut off without warning once the battery was drained to 10% or so. This, too, had to be replaced under warranty.
The other day I turned on my Pro. The startup tone was played, the DVD drive made the familliar buzzing noise, and the fans spun up -- but nothing appeared on the display. Either the screen or the graphics card has failed. This is just a couple months out of the standard warranty period. It's being looked at by a service centre who are charging me $50 just to find out what the problem is. If it's the graphics card, because apparently Nvidia shipped a few million bad GPUs, it will be fixed for free. Otherwise, I'm fucked.
Some will say the moral of the story is to spend $260 on an extortionate warranty for your laptop. But actually I have a better idea: buy a PC. Asus notebooks, for example, come with a two-year warranty out of the box, and from what I can tell are far less failure-prone than Macs. Avoid these overpriced status symbols unless you really, really, really want to run OSX.
Just to provide some balance to this anecdote, I bought a Macbook Pro January 2008 and have had it a year. Not a single aspect of it has broken or is working any less than optimal. I have Windows XP bootcamped on a separate partition and that runs smooth as silk. In fact, I play Left 4 Dead on it and it runs great on decent settings.
More importantly, I wasn't just buying it for the OS, which is neither here nor there with both Apple and Microsoft having pros and cons, but for the hardware. I travel a lot, and the Macbook is sturdy and robust and has been covered in salt water spray from a yacht off Baffin Island and lied on Moroccan sand dunes and still works great.
I think if you are buying a Mac, especially a laptop, consider that while it is expensive, I at least have found it to be invaluable. When I'm using it abroad or on assignment, dealing with shit like I do with my Pc is something I literally cannot afford to do, especially when on deadline.
Now, my Pc has performed as well too, because I look after my shit. But there is certainly a level of reliance I can put on my mac that I cant on a PC.
Plus, well, if you plan on working in any sort of magazine/newspaper writing every single computer will be a Mac, so it makes it a little easier to get your job done.
And don't think for a second that you're paying "less" because you got the lower end version, they started at that price point and then moved upwards from there. It makes no sense when pricing tiers to start at the tier that represents the amount you've decided that you need to make, and then offer less expensive versions. You start with what you need to make and add additional, more expensive versions and then invent justifications for users to buy them. You can either pay what they wanted you to pay, or you can pay them bonus dollars for the whole thing.
Not to mention that the upgrade from XP to Vista is preeeeeetty incremental. There's not much in Vista that gives you a real reason to upgrade other than XP being no longer supported and unavailable for purchase. Every time OS X comes out with an upgrade I can find at least a handful of compelling reasons to go ahead with it.
It's not incremental in the least. The new driver model is a titanic and necessary change. XP isn't just unsupported; it's old and doesn't stack up well to actual modern consumer OSes (like OSX). Vista was a huge tech refresh, but hyped up as some super-featured consumer oriented toy. It wasn't that in the least, but it was necessary to drag the Windows ecosystem into the league of modern OSes and undo years of momentum in the wrong directions.
Windows isn't priced out from the lower editions, either. The pricing waterfall doesn't work like that, particularly Vista Basic which has been documented as priced/scaled based on other factors. Retarded factors, yeah, but it's not "price Basic/Home and scale up".
Yeah, honestly I don't hear a lot of people whining the way Azio perpetually does about how horrible his mac has been to him. I'm typing this on a four year old iBook that's never had a single hardware issue.
Pheezer on
IT'S GOT ME REACHING IN MY POCKET IT'S GOT ME FORKING OVER CASH
CUZ THERE'S SOMETHING IN THE MIDDLE AND IT'S GIVING ME A RASH
You're like the only guy with a g4 ibook who hasn't suffered a major hardware failure, though. Those things are pieces of junk prone to wifi/gpu/mainboard failure. I own one and serviced --note the past-tense, because it should say something about reliability-- a school district worth of them, too, so please do take my word for it when I tell you how lucky you are. Or just google.
They're also horrible shits to take apart and service. At one point I was taking them apart so often (to salvage still-working components to fix newly broken ibooks) that at night I would dream of it.
I kinda chuckle at stories about machines that exploded the instant the guy walked out of the store OR machines that withstood a bullet and a hurricane AND still kick ass at playing crysis. They're the same machines, after all, just with different cases. If you want a real rugged computer, go look at what you can get for hazardous environments.
We have an ibook lying around that's been beat up for years, but it's still chugging along.
The problem here is that nvidia used a different kind of solder with a different melting point for the substrates as they did for the dies, and the repeated mechanical stress from turning a high-powered laptop on and off (heating it up to 80 degrees and then cooling it down to room temperature) multiple times in a day causes the tiny connections between the substrate and die to break. Dozens of notebook models from multiple manufacturers are having mass GPU failures. From the sounds of it, every nvidia chip using the 65nm or 55nm process is either broken or will break due to thermal stress. They are still blaming OEMs, suppliers and end users for the problem but it is their fault.
Right now Apple is eating the cost on the notebooks that break, which is extremely cool of them. Still, it is only covered for two years. I will probably flip it next summer and buy something else, before it breaks again.
Plus, well, if you plan on working in any sort of magazine/newspaper writing every single computer will be a Mac, so it makes it a little easier to get your job done.
I think this was the case a decade+ ago, but is no longer the rule.
Improvolone on
Voice actor for hire. My time is free if your project is!
Really, it's hit or miss. When Macs were really sucking (1998-2002) and PCs were cheap and ran the same software, lots of places were lured away. Some weathered the storm, some switched back, but many just remained PC-based. In publishing, deadlines mean a whole lot of platform inertia. One hiccup can be the end of the world.
Yeah but why do I have to pay $60 extra for a fully functional version of the OS? Some of the shit that you have to pay extra for is even pretty basic stuff that most people would be used to seeing in the OS by now.
Yeah, one example: Changing the fucking language of the system - Ultimate feature. It seems it hasn't occurred to Microsoft that maybe, just maybe different users with different main languages want to use the same computer - or that you might get stuck in a different part of the world because of employment reasons and want to work with a newly bought OS in your native language. Its just a way to artificially add one additional bullet point to the Windows Vista Ultimate feature list. While I agree that translations don't pop out of nowhere, this seems to be the wrong way to handle this. Especially if there are free alternatives which provide every translation I could possibly want.
Funny that MS appear to hide this fact. ("Tinfoil hat on-mode") When I was searching for multi language support in office, I was trapped in an endless loop of a "productivity sub site" which priced the ability to integrate office into a "multi cultural business environment" (yes it does, if you follow the tiny link on the site and actually buy the "language pack" and/or the additional proofing tools, which might or might not be sold separately from that, based on your MS Office version)
And no, a subset of a language (US-English - UK-English, Switzerland-DE - German-DE) doesn't count as "multilingual".
But I have to agree here this bullshit is/was on both sides. For example back in 2002 - 2003 DVD reading capability and CD-burning were reserved to the pro-line of Apple machine and to the high-end configs of the "consumer" line. Maybe I remember it incorrectly, but even then entry level "Windows"-notebooks could read DVDs then. But no, you had to pay $300 - $400 more for the next iBook configuation which came with a DVD drive / CD-burner. Even external, third party drives were excluded to interact with the Apple iLife suite and Final Cut. You had to install a modification which basically changed the signature of the device driver - this way external drives were marked as "Apple drives" and could be used to burn CDs/DvDs from Final Cut, iTunes etc. Absolutely bullshit.
Other bullshit from the same company: Selling macs with 128MB RAM and OSX pre-installed (even at the end of the 10.2 times, when it was absolutely clear that OSX requires more than this for optimum performance -thankfully you could upgrade). Introducing a new mac model a few weeks before the next OSX release and including a graphic card which couldn't make use of the new features (HW accelerated Core Image) - I am looking at you Mac mini G4. Including a Intel GMA chipset in the original plastic Macbook - When Apple announced the switch to the Intel platform, and following the previous trail of bullshit decisions I predicted exactly this and was met with negative responses on various Mac-Forums. "No, Quartz needs a dedicated graphic card, bla, etc. " Who is laughing now, "Bwahaha." - no really.
Which brings me to my current point. I bought the new Macbook (alu) and I am pretty satisfied the purchase. With the aluminum body it feels like a smaller version of the Macbook pro. Build quality is important to me. I used to sell (had to, at this job) lousy plastic monstrosities (cheap notebooks), which felt they will break apart by just looking at them from the wrong angle. Even when Apples notebooks were all plastic I liked the build quality, the lid closing mechanism without flimsy plastic clips, the simple form - To sum it up, the product was/is fun to use. (But of course, still had their share of problems)
The same holds true for the new Macbook. Thanks to its new body its very sturdy but still lightweight. The nvidia graphic chip gives me access to white array of software + games compared to the crap Intel GMA which Jon Bob 2 man team cooked up in the cellar and wrote the drivers for. Heck the new Macbook even runs HL episode 2 at full resolution at high detail (I disabled HDR of course). I mean, I don't need billions of normal mapped polygons on the go, just let me pop in my 2 - 4 year old game and let me play it without graphic anormalities and performance issues. Thats the only thing I ask for, regarding "portable entertainment."
A good thing is that whoever designed this thing got his/her head out of whatever rock or body hole and made the HD replacement a nice and simple process. (Ok this applies for the plastic Macbooks as well).
The glass over the screen seems a hit or miss regarding protection of the screen - better for the cases where you have people sticking their fingers on the screen if they want to draw attention to something happening on a specific spot (god, I hate those people), or generally making the screen more resistant - less regarding the durably if the notebook is boing carried with other stuff (If you pack your ibook with heavy / high lbs files you need to get your computer license revoked anyway, if there were such a thing).
Sorry for the rant-heavy post.
If you have the money to spend and if you are interested in the Mac - platform. Get a mac.
The good thing OSX already provides lots of *nix functionality. (and makes a exceptional job at hiding it) You have a X-Server, different shells, terminal, and a wide selection ports. Most likley - if you can find it on Linux, there should be a version which at least runs under Intel OSX. Plus, you have a system which has 100% functionality out of the box (Not saying that Linux doesn't if it comes pre-configured with the machine, but some notebook HW can be really troublesome / time-consuming to configure / troubleshoot with Linux.)
The obvious question is: How often to you need to change languages?
This is the entire point of tiered releases. I don't have hard facts. I would be fucking knocked off my fucking feet if more than 10% of the user base needs multilingual support. Adding multilingual support from an American company cost some money in some regard.
Now yes, there is some degree to which even Home Basic purchasers payed for all the development.
But why should I pay, even if it's minimal amounts of money, for the development of something I don't use? I'm a home premium user. I was concerned at first, maybe I should get ultimate, blah blah blah. I have never thought that I need something more than what home premium provides. I'm ok with not paying the premium for the stuff I don't use.
The obvious question is: How often to you need to change languages?
This is the entire point of tiered releases. I don't have hard facts. I would be fucking knocked off my fucking feet if more than 10% of the user base needs multilingual support. Adding multilingual support from an American company cost some money in some regard.
Now yes, there is some degree to which even Home Basic purchasers payed for all the development.
But why should I pay, even if it's minimal amounts of money, for the development of something I don't use? I'm a home premium user. I was concerned at first, maybe I should get ultimate, blah blah blah. I have never thought that I need something more than what home premium provides. I'm ok with not paying the premium for the stuff I don't use.
The problem with Vista's multi-tiered pricing isn't that you don't have to pay for something you won't use. If that were the case, it would actually be kind of nice to have the option.
The problem is that the pricing scheme is incredibly ridiculous compared to OS X, or even Windows XP. Home Basic costs $199. That's more than Leopard, and the same price as XP Home was. But no one in their right mind would buy Home Basic, because it's missing so much functionality. Home Premium is $259, and that's already more than you were paying for XP, and twice as much as a copy of Leopard.
Home Premium is still missing basic features. Home Premium doesn't support RDP, or the new Windows Backup and Restore features, or as someone else said, scanning and faxing.. Is this stuff necessary for most home users? No, but if you pay more for Business to get any of those features, you then lose features that Home Premium offers like Media Center or burning DVDs. To get both, you have to go all the way to Vista Ultimate, which is pricier still than XP Pro ever was, just to get what you need out of your OS.
Home Basic offered almost no change over XP Home (the only real differences are integrated search and things like IE sandboxing), but was consistent price wise. Home Premium has no XP analog in retail (the closest was OEM only Media Center, which matched Home Premium's price) and Biz/XP Pro were the same cost. Comparing retail pricing to OS X is stupid too; OEM pricing is more in line in terms of usage and functionality.
Also, do individual users need multi language support, or businesses? Businesses don't buy retail unless they're fucking retarded (or need 1-4 copies), and there are multiple cheaper-than-retail ways to get MUI support under Volume Licensing. XP Pro didn't contain MUI functionality either, so this wasn't an improvement, but certainly no change.
Honestly, if these were such big issues, why didn't people complain about the SAME EXACT FEATURE SETS under XP? Not to mention you couldn't even buy Media Center edition retail. There's plenty to complain about, but most of the bitching on this last page seems based in parroting internet memes.
Morskittar on
0
Options
minor incidentexpert in a dying fieldnjRegistered Userregular
Yeah but why do I have to pay $60 extra for a fully functional version of the OS? Some of the shit that you have to pay extra for is even pretty basic stuff that most people would be used to seeing in the OS by now.
Yeah, one example: Changing the fucking language of the system - Ultimate feature. It seems it hasn't occurred to Microsoft that maybe, just maybe different users with different main languages want to use the same computer - or that you might get stuck in a different part of the world because of employment reasons and want to work with a newly bought OS in your native language. Its just a way to artificially add one additional bullet point to the Windows Vista Ultimate feature list. While I agree that translations don't pop out of nowhere, this seems to be the wrong way to handle this. Especially if there are free alternatives which provide every translation I could possibly want.
Funny that MS appear to hide this fact. ("Tinfoil hat on-mode") When I was searching for multi language support in office, I was trapped in an endless loop of a "productivity sub site" which priced the ability to integrate office into a "multi cultural business environment" (yes it does, if you follow the tiny link on the site and actually buy the "language pack" and/or the additional proofing tools, which might or might not be sold separately from that, based on your MS Office version)
And no, a subset of a language (US-English - UK-English, Switzerland-DE - German-DE) doesn't count as "multilingual".
But I have to agree here this bullshit is/was on both sides. For example back in 2002 - 2003 DVD reading capability and CD-burning were reserved to the pro-line of Apple machine and to the high-end configs of the "consumer" line. Maybe I remember it incorrectly, but even then entry level "Windows"-notebooks could read DVDs then. But no, you had to pay $300 - $400 more for the next iBook configuation which came with a DVD drive / CD-burner. Even external, third party drives were excluded to interact with the Apple iLife suite and Final Cut. You had to install a modification which basically changed the signature of the device driver - this way external drives were marked as "Apple drives" and could be used to burn CDs/DvDs from Final Cut, iTunes etc. Absolutely bullshit.
Other bullshit from the same company: Selling macs with 128MB RAM and OSX pre-installed (even at the end of the 10.2 times, when it was absolutely clear that OSX requires more than this for optimum performance -thankfully you could upgrade). Introducing a new mac model a few weeks before the next OSX release and including a graphic card which couldn't make use of the new features (HW accelerated Core Image) - I am looking at you Mac mini G4. Including a Intel GMA chipset in the original plastic Macbook - When Apple announced the switch to the Intel platform, and following the previous trail of bullshit decisions I predicted exactly this and was met with negative responses on various Mac-Forums. "No, Quartz needs a dedicated graphic card, bla, etc. " Who is laughing now, "Bwahaha." - no really.
Which brings me to my current point. I bought the new Macbook (alu) and I am pretty satisfied the purchase. With the aluminum body it feels like a smaller version of the Macbook pro. Build quality is important to me. I used to sell (had to, at this job) lousy plastic monstrosities (cheap notebooks), which felt they will break apart by just looking at them from the wrong angle. Even when Apples notebooks were all plastic I liked the build quality, the lid closing mechanism without flimsy plastic clips, the simple form - To sum it up, the product was/is fun to use. (But of course, still had their share of problems)
The same holds true for the new Macbook. Thanks to its new body its very sturdy but still lightweight. The nvidia graphic chip gives me access to white array of software + games compared to the crap Intel GMA which Jon Bob 2 man team cooked up in the cellar and wrote the drivers for. Heck the new Macbook even runs HL episode 2 at full resolution at high detail (I disabled HDR of course). I mean, I don't need billions of normal mapped polygons on the go, just let me pop in my 2 - 4 year old game and let me play it without graphic anormalities and performance issues. Thats the only thing I ask for, regarding "portable entertainment."
A good thing is that whoever designed this thing got his/her head out of whatever rock or body hole and made the HD replacement a nice and simple process. (Ok this applies for the plastic Macbooks as well).
The glass over the screen seems a hit or miss regarding protection of the screen - better for the cases where you have people sticking their fingers on the screen if they want to draw attention to something happening on a specific spot (god, I hate those people), or generally making the screen more resistant - less regarding the durably if the notebook is boing carried with other stuff (If you pack your ibook with heavy / high lbs files you need to get your computer license revoked anyway, if there were such a thing).
Sorry for the rant-heavy post.
If you have the money to spend and if you are interested in the Mac - platform. Get a mac.
The good thing OSX already provides lots of *nix functionality. (and makes a exceptional job at hiding it) You have a X-Server, different shells, terminal, and a wide selection ports. Most likley - if you can find it on Linux, there should be a version which at least runs under Intel OSX. Plus, you have a system which has 100% functionality out of the box (Not saying that Linux doesn't if it comes pre-configured with the machine, but some notebook HW can be really troublesome / time-consuming to configure / troubleshoot with Linux.)
Everything you said is totally true and as impartial as I can imagine anyone being. Also, honestly, it's about fucking time Apple got their portable lineup (mostly) together and had decent (read: usable) graphics across the board and started shipping everything with *enough* RAM.
Also, whoever at Apple was designing the internals of these machines from 2001-2006 needs to be shot. Even a seemingly simple machine like a G5 PowerMac was a BITCH to work on, and the Mac Pro FINALLY came along and fixed EVERYTHING. Same deal for the iBook -> MacBook transition.
I can tell you that every tech at Apple breathed a huge sigh of relief upon seeing the tech guides for every new machine since 2006, and even more so in the last year. Apple's finally making killer machines again.
Oh, and for the record, I got an iBook just before the whole Quartz Extreme bullshit thing, and I got a MacBook literally 20 days prior to the Core2Duo (from Core Duo) upgrade. I'm glad I have nothing to be furious about with my new MBPro.
minor incident on
Ah, it stinks, it sucks, it's anthropologically unjust
0
Options
minor incidentexpert in a dying fieldnjRegistered Userregular
Home Basic offered almost no change over XP Home (the only real differences are integrated search and things like IE sandboxing), but was consistent price wise. Home Premium has no XP analog in retail (the closest was OEM only Media Center, which matched Home Premium's price) and Biz/XP Pro were the same cost. Comparing retail pricing to OS X is stupid too; OEM pricing is more in line in terms of usage and functionality.
Also, do individual users need multi language support, or businesses? Businesses don't buy retail unless they're fucking retarded (or need 1-4 copies), and there are plenty of cheaper-than-retail ways to get MUI support under Volume Licensing. XP Pro didn't contain MUI functionality either, so this wasn't an improvement, but certainly no change.
Honestly, if these were such big issues, why didn't people complain about the SAME EXACT FEATURE SETS under XP? Not to mention you couldn't even buy Media Center edition retail. There's plenty to complain about, but most of the bitching on this last page seems based in parroting internet memes.
The point of the matter isn't "Vista Home isn't any worse than XP Home," it's "Vista Home is drastically worse than OS X or most any Linux distro."
Windows has lost TREMENDOUS home user marketshare over the last few years, and if Microsoft wants to lure people back away from Linux/OS X (their only real pool to draw from, really), they need to be competitive to THOSE users, too.
And I'm pretty sure plenty of people complained about the same things under XP. Isn't that why NO ONE uses XP Home? Just like people avoid Vista Basic like the plague?
minor incident on
Ah, it stinks, it sucks, it's anthropologically unjust
XP Home was more acceptable for its time, because it wasn't competing directly against moder OSes for the bulk of its lifespan. XP Home was also Media Center edition minus the actual media functionality; Vista Home has the guts ripped out of it as a favor to Intel so it can run without one of Vista's biggest changes (the new drive model). There's more to complain about Vista Basic's existance than anything about XP Home (for its time, at least).
So... I'm with you on that, but comparing the pricing of Home Premium retail to XP Home or OS X is inconsistent.
Morskittar on
0
Options
minor incidentexpert in a dying fieldnjRegistered Userregular
So... I'm with you on that, but comparing the pricing of Home Premium retail to XP Home or OS X is inconsistent.
I think the price comparison is stupid and pointless, though, I'm mainly just talking about usability and feature set. A good OS can cost money. I'm cool with paying for important things. $100? $200? $300? Doesn't matter as much as the quality and the feature set.
Now, that doesn't mean I want to be nickeled and dimed for the features I need just so that Microsoft can list a low base price in their commercials.
minor incident on
Ah, it stinks, it sucks, it's anthropologically unjust
Home Basic existed for entirely different reasons though. Microsoft's pricing just doesn't work like that. It's built to cascade downward or play off of segementation through logical tiers and the division of feature sets and marketing come afterward. The business groups that make the products initiate pricing; the marketing and sales people get to make due with what's given them. Unfortunately, the customer service people are in the same boat.
Doesn't make much difference in the end, though; Home Basic is still shit and should have never existed in the first place.
Morskittar on
0
Options
minor incidentexpert in a dying fieldnjRegistered Userregular
But seriously. The idea that people need so many versions at so many price points is just stupid. There's no good argument to support it, and if you have one, you're wrong. What Microsoft needs to learn is how to make one OS with everything, but keep the less commonly used stuff shuffled away from Grandma Jeanie who just wants solitaire. Get ballsy and chop down your product line with a machete.
But they won't do that. Not in my lifetime, anyway. Not with Balmer at the helm.
But I'd be happy for them to prove me wrong, though.
minor incident on
Ah, it stinks, it sucks, it's anthropologically unjust
I agree, for the most part; at least a few versions or a "corporate subscription add-on pack" for some of the additional stuff (MUI, MDOP, add'l virtualization rights) that consumers will never need. Consumers though? One version is plenty at a middling price point. It can't happen though.
Besides Ballmer being too stuck in his ways to do this, the first person in the US or EU to complain about not being able to use a feature (like AD connectivity) and MS either has to say that feature has no value (which is a slippery slope) or governments (especially the EU) force multiple editions anyway (like Win N editions).
That's the downside of having abused a monopoly in the past decade or two; Microsoft often can't do what makes sense, as minority complaints need to be given more weight, unlike for a company like Apple. The company is legally bound to make decisions that appeal to everyone in the entire world.
Morskittar on
0
Options
minor incidentexpert in a dying fieldnjRegistered Userregular
I agree, for the most part; at least a few versions or a "corporate subscription add-on pack" for some of the additional stuff (MUI, MDOP, add'l virtualization rights) that consumers will never need. Consumers though? One version is plenty at a middling price point. It can't happen though.
Besides Ballmer being too stuck in his ways to do this, the first person in the US or EU to complain about not being able to use a feature (like AD connectivity) and MS either has to say that feature has no value (which is a slippery slope) or governments (especially the EU) force multiple editions anyway (like Win N editions).
That's the downside of having abused a monopoly in the past decade or two; Microsoft often can't do what makes sense, as minority complaints need to be given more weight, unlike for a company like Apple. The company is legally bound to make decisions that appeal to everyone in the entire world.
That's a good point. The only issue is that I don't think Ballmar sees "having to appeal to everyone in the entire world" as a downside. He has this jack-of-all-trades/master-of-nothing mentality that causes Microsoft to do lots of things half-assed. I mean, have you heard the guy talk? He THINKS Microsoft is the most innovative, admired brand in every sector in which they compete.
At least Jobs has the balls to admit that their foray into home theatre left a lot to be desired.
minor incident on
Ah, it stinks, it sucks, it's anthropologically unjust
I don't think he thinks that (or any attitude that's forced by an outside factor), but he clearly believes in a "positive-at-all-costs" management style. This filters through a lot of the old guard in the company; the types who were floored by Vista's reception. The types who respond to crazy activation schemes pissing customers off with a "oh... we didn't think of that..."
I hope someone like Ray Ozzie gets Ballmer's job sooner rather than later. Ballmer seems to have good business sense and all, but only where it's *completely* untempered by appreciation for things that aren't cold, hard facts (like customer needs, until they're affecting sales).
Morskittar on
0
Options
minor incidentexpert in a dying fieldnjRegistered Userregular
I hope someone like Ray Ozzie gets Ballmer's job sooner rather than later. Ballmer seems to have good business sense and all, but only where it's *completely* untempered by appreciation for things that aren't cold, hard facts (like customer needs, until they're affecting sales).
I agree 100%.
minor incident on
Ah, it stinks, it sucks, it's anthropologically unjust
Of course, any future goodwill the company might be able to find in using its resoruces smarter will be an uphill battle at this point. Vista wasn't a failure for technical reasons (it still pisses me off when people talk about it being buggy - that wasn't the problem!), but it was a failure in that it didn't cater to consumers' needs, and MS' customers generally want to hate the company after things like Windows Genuine Advantage. Stir in Apple's aggressive marketing and increased mass-media blog coverage and you suddenly have a "buggy" OS.
That said, the poor reception for Vista kind of woke MS up to that whole "customer needs" blind spot. Might turn out to be the best thing that's happened to the company since IBM bungling their business model.
The obvious question is: How often to you need to change languages?
This is the entire point of tiered releases. I don't have hard facts. I would be fucking knocked off my fucking feet if more than 10% of the user base needs multilingual support. Adding multilingual support from an American company cost some money in some regard.
Now yes, there is some degree to which even Home Basic purchasers payed for all the development.
But why should I pay, even if it's minimal amounts of money, for the development of something I don't use? I'm a home premium user. I was concerned at first, maybe I should get ultimate, blah blah blah. I have never thought that I need something more than what home premium provides. I'm ok with not paying the premium for the stuff I don't use.
Yeah the case I described might be special, but if you spend _additional_ money for an IMO expensive product (license), you could at least expect more flexibility and more basic functionality. It isn't the case that the translation have to be made especially for me, they had to be created anyway because MS operates in different countries. - and the translations are already on the disc. Even an option to swap the language afterwards, after online-activation or verification would be nice, so their windows genuie (sp?) would be actually useful for the csm. But no, I had to borrow the install media from somewhere else, in order to get the language I wanted.
Yes, I consider translation / multiple languages a very basic functionality, but maybe thats just my priorities speaking here.
I don't remember it being brought up at all, perhaps it has, but it seems like everyone always quotes the full price of Windows. If you bought XP for $200, you can get the upgrade version of Home Premium for $130 or Ultimate for $230. That's hardly expensive and quite reasonable for the OS. I understand OSX costs $130 whether you are buying new or for an upgrade, but it's also had a lot more revisions as well.
If I'm paying $230 for the Ultimate version now, and will keep that OS for the next 3-4 years until I upgrade my computer, that's not that bad of an investment even if someone does consider it "overpriced". Keeping a Gold XBox Live account costs more than Home Premium..
Here's a question, I have a Samsung HD LCD TV (20") that I would like to use with a Macbook, easy enough to connect? do I need an adapdotr to use the standard monitor cable?
I'm not a fan of windows' tiered pricing, though I do understand it.
Nor am I a fan of OS-X's incremental updates that you get to pay for.
Just to chime in on the largely meaningless debate over operating system cost.
You know what else sucks? Fucking oil changes.
Yes.
Some things cost money.
largely meaningless debate
OSX "point releases" aren't any different than, say, Windows 2000->XP (NT 5.0->5.1) or Windows Vista -> 7 (NT 6.0-6.1).
Yes.
largely meaningless debate
Anyone getting the point yet? If you want windows or OS-X, then, as with any software that costs money (for those of us who fit between the brackets of 'law abiding' and 'law fearing') you have to pay for it.
Both operating systems are closely enough priced that paying for them only matters in the relative sense that there are other operating systems that you don't have to pay for. Which makes the debate in the last page or two largely meaningless.
I'm not a fan of windows' tiered pricing, though I do understand it.
Nor am I a fan of OS-X's incremental updates that you get to pay for.
Just to chime in on the largely meaningless debate over operating system cost.
OSX "point releases" aren't any different than, say, Windows 2000->XP (NT 5.0->5.1) or Windows Vista -> 7 (NT 6.0-6.1).
It's not exactly the same thing. MS gives updates for the life of the OS, which is several years, as part of the price. These updates include back ported functionality. Windows 2000 got compatibility mode (one of the few things I can remember off the top of my head). And Vista will be getting code base & kernel updates from Windows 7.
I'm not a fan of windows' tiered pricing, though I do understand it.
Nor am I a fan of OS-X's incremental updates that you get to pay for.
Just to chime in on the largely meaningless debate over operating system cost.
OSX "point releases" aren't any different than, say, Windows 2000->XP (NT 5.0->5.1) or Windows Vista -> 7 (NT 6.0-6.1).
It's not exactly the same thing. MS gives updates for the life of the OS, which is several years, as part of the price. These updates include back ported functionality. Windows 2000 got compatibility mode (one of the few things I can remember off the top of my head). And Vista will be getting code base & kernel updates from Windows 7.
You know Apple does this, too, right? 10.4.11 came out after Leopard launched. A similar example exists for most every OS X update.
minor incident on
Ah, it stinks, it sucks, it's anthropologically unjust
Posts
If I don't want to pay extra for functions I don't need, then I won't, and I'm glad Microsoft gives me that option, unlike Apple.
And I'm sure Apple would be raked over the coals for having an all-inclusive version if they'd been convicted of abusing a monopoly a decade or so ago. If they did, I still wouldn't understand complaints about having three or four editions visible to consumers.
Oh, I can understand it. The way they've defined their tiers is bizarre and pointless and elements of basic functionality got shuffled out of the reasonable person edition of the OS to bulk up the super extra ridiculous edition's list of exclusive features. A number of pointless and just plain odd differences were inserted and that's stupid.
And don't think for a second that you're paying "less" because you got the lower end version, they started at that price point and then moved upwards from there. It makes no sense when pricing tiers to start at the tier that represents the amount you've decided that you need to make, and then offer less expensive versions. You start with what you need to make and add additional, more expensive versions and then invent justifications for users to buy them. You can either pay what they wanted you to pay, or you can pay them bonus dollars for the whole thing.
Not to mention that the upgrade from XP to Vista is preeeeeetty incremental. There's not much in Vista that gives you a real reason to upgrade other than XP being no longer supported and unavailable for purchase. Every time OS X comes out with an upgrade I can find at least a handful of compelling reasons to go ahead with it.
CUZ THERE'S SOMETHING IN THE MIDDLE AND IT'S GIVING ME A RASH
Just to provide some balance to this anecdote, I bought a Macbook Pro January 2008 and have had it a year. Not a single aspect of it has broken or is working any less than optimal. I have Windows XP bootcamped on a separate partition and that runs smooth as silk. In fact, I play Left 4 Dead on it and it runs great on decent settings.
More importantly, I wasn't just buying it for the OS, which is neither here nor there with both Apple and Microsoft having pros and cons, but for the hardware. I travel a lot, and the Macbook is sturdy and robust and has been covered in salt water spray from a yacht off Baffin Island and lied on Moroccan sand dunes and still works great.
I think if you are buying a Mac, especially a laptop, consider that while it is expensive, I at least have found it to be invaluable. When I'm using it abroad or on assignment, dealing with shit like I do with my Pc is something I literally cannot afford to do, especially when on deadline.
Now, my Pc has performed as well too, because I look after my shit. But there is certainly a level of reliance I can put on my mac that I cant on a PC.
Plus, well, if you plan on working in any sort of magazine/newspaper writing every single computer will be a Mac, so it makes it a little easier to get your job done.
It's not incremental in the least. The new driver model is a titanic and necessary change. XP isn't just unsupported; it's old and doesn't stack up well to actual modern consumer OSes (like OSX). Vista was a huge tech refresh, but hyped up as some super-featured consumer oriented toy. It wasn't that in the least, but it was necessary to drag the Windows ecosystem into the league of modern OSes and undo years of momentum in the wrong directions.
Windows isn't priced out from the lower editions, either. The pricing waterfall doesn't work like that, particularly Vista Basic which has been documented as priced/scaled based on other factors. Retarded factors, yeah, but it's not "price Basic/Home and scale up".
CUZ THERE'S SOMETHING IN THE MIDDLE AND IT'S GIVING ME A RASH
They're also horrible shits to take apart and service. At one point I was taking them apart so often (to salvage still-working components to fix newly broken ibooks) that at night I would dream of it.
I kinda chuckle at stories about machines that exploded the instant the guy walked out of the store OR machines that withstood a bullet and a hurricane AND still kick ass at playing crysis. They're the same machines, after all, just with different cases. If you want a real rugged computer, go look at what you can get for hazardous environments.
The problem here is that nvidia used a different kind of solder with a different melting point for the substrates as they did for the dies, and the repeated mechanical stress from turning a high-powered laptop on and off (heating it up to 80 degrees and then cooling it down to room temperature) multiple times in a day causes the tiny connections between the substrate and die to break. Dozens of notebook models from multiple manufacturers are having mass GPU failures. From the sounds of it, every nvidia chip using the 65nm or 55nm process is either broken or will break due to thermal stress. They are still blaming OEMs, suppliers and end users for the problem but it is their fault.
Right now Apple is eating the cost on the notebooks that break, which is extremely cool of them. Still, it is only covered for two years. I will probably flip it next summer and buy something else, before it breaks again.
Yeah, one example: Changing the fucking language of the system - Ultimate feature. It seems it hasn't occurred to Microsoft that maybe, just maybe different users with different main languages want to use the same computer - or that you might get stuck in a different part of the world because of employment reasons and want to work with a newly bought OS in your native language. Its just a way to artificially add one additional bullet point to the Windows Vista Ultimate feature list. While I agree that translations don't pop out of nowhere, this seems to be the wrong way to handle this. Especially if there are free alternatives which provide every translation I could possibly want.
Funny that MS appear to hide this fact. ("Tinfoil hat on-mode") When I was searching for multi language support in office, I was trapped in an endless loop of a "productivity sub site" which priced the ability to integrate office into a "multi cultural business environment" (yes it does, if you follow the tiny link on the site and actually buy the "language pack" and/or the additional proofing tools, which might or might not be sold separately from that, based on your MS Office version)
And no, a subset of a language (US-English - UK-English, Switzerland-DE - German-DE) doesn't count as "multilingual".
But I have to agree here this bullshit is/was on both sides. For example back in 2002 - 2003 DVD reading capability and CD-burning were reserved to the pro-line of Apple machine and to the high-end configs of the "consumer" line. Maybe I remember it incorrectly, but even then entry level "Windows"-notebooks could read DVDs then. But no, you had to pay $300 - $400 more for the next iBook configuation which came with a DVD drive / CD-burner. Even external, third party drives were excluded to interact with the Apple iLife suite and Final Cut. You had to install a modification which basically changed the signature of the device driver - this way external drives were marked as "Apple drives" and could be used to burn CDs/DvDs from Final Cut, iTunes etc. Absolutely bullshit.
Other bullshit from the same company: Selling macs with 128MB RAM and OSX pre-installed (even at the end of the 10.2 times, when it was absolutely clear that OSX requires more than this for optimum performance -thankfully you could upgrade). Introducing a new mac model a few weeks before the next OSX release and including a graphic card which couldn't make use of the new features (HW accelerated Core Image) - I am looking at you Mac mini G4. Including a Intel GMA chipset in the original plastic Macbook - When Apple announced the switch to the Intel platform, and following the previous trail of bullshit decisions I predicted exactly this and was met with negative responses on various Mac-Forums. "No, Quartz needs a dedicated graphic card, bla, etc. " Who is laughing now, "Bwahaha." - no really.
Which brings me to my current point. I bought the new Macbook (alu) and I am pretty satisfied the purchase. With the aluminum body it feels like a smaller version of the Macbook pro. Build quality is important to me. I used to sell (had to, at this job) lousy plastic monstrosities (cheap notebooks), which felt they will break apart by just looking at them from the wrong angle. Even when Apples notebooks were all plastic I liked the build quality, the lid closing mechanism without flimsy plastic clips, the simple form - To sum it up, the product was/is fun to use. (But of course, still had their share of problems)
The same holds true for the new Macbook. Thanks to its new body its very sturdy but still lightweight. The nvidia graphic chip gives me access to white array of software + games compared to the crap Intel GMA which Jon Bob 2 man team cooked up in the cellar and wrote the drivers for. Heck the new Macbook even runs HL episode 2 at full resolution at high detail (I disabled HDR of course). I mean, I don't need billions of normal mapped polygons on the go, just let me pop in my 2 - 4 year old game and let me play it without graphic anormalities and performance issues. Thats the only thing I ask for, regarding "portable entertainment."
A good thing is that whoever designed this thing got his/her head out of whatever rock or body hole and made the HD replacement a nice and simple process. (Ok this applies for the plastic Macbooks as well).
The glass over the screen seems a hit or miss regarding protection of the screen - better for the cases where you have people sticking their fingers on the screen if they want to draw attention to something happening on a specific spot (god, I hate those people), or generally making the screen more resistant - less regarding the durably if the notebook is boing carried with other stuff (If you pack your ibook with heavy / high lbs files you need to get your computer license revoked anyway, if there were such a thing).
Sorry for the rant-heavy post.
If you have the money to spend and if you are interested in the Mac - platform. Get a mac.
The good thing OSX already provides lots of *nix functionality. (and makes a exceptional job at hiding it) You have a X-Server, different shells, terminal, and a wide selection ports. Most likley - if you can find it on Linux, there should be a version which at least runs under Intel OSX. Plus, you have a system which has 100% functionality out of the box (Not saying that Linux doesn't if it comes pre-configured with the machine, but some notebook HW can be really troublesome / time-consuming to configure / troubleshoot with Linux.)
This is the entire point of tiered releases. I don't have hard facts. I would be fucking knocked off my fucking feet if more than 10% of the user base needs multilingual support. Adding multilingual support from an American company cost some money in some regard.
Now yes, there is some degree to which even Home Basic purchasers payed for all the development.
But why should I pay, even if it's minimal amounts of money, for the development of something I don't use? I'm a home premium user. I was concerned at first, maybe I should get ultimate, blah blah blah. I have never thought that I need something more than what home premium provides. I'm ok with not paying the premium for the stuff I don't use.
The problem with Vista's multi-tiered pricing isn't that you don't have to pay for something you won't use. If that were the case, it would actually be kind of nice to have the option.
The problem is that the pricing scheme is incredibly ridiculous compared to OS X, or even Windows XP. Home Basic costs $199. That's more than Leopard, and the same price as XP Home was. But no one in their right mind would buy Home Basic, because it's missing so much functionality. Home Premium is $259, and that's already more than you were paying for XP, and twice as much as a copy of Leopard.
Home Premium is still missing basic features. Home Premium doesn't support RDP, or the new Windows Backup and Restore features, or as someone else said, scanning and faxing.. Is this stuff necessary for most home users? No, but if you pay more for Business to get any of those features, you then lose features that Home Premium offers like Media Center or burning DVDs. To get both, you have to go all the way to Vista Ultimate, which is pricier still than XP Pro ever was, just to get what you need out of your OS.
Also, do individual users need multi language support, or businesses? Businesses don't buy retail unless they're fucking retarded (or need 1-4 copies), and there are multiple cheaper-than-retail ways to get MUI support under Volume Licensing. XP Pro didn't contain MUI functionality either, so this wasn't an improvement, but certainly no change.
Honestly, if these were such big issues, why didn't people complain about the SAME EXACT FEATURE SETS under XP? Not to mention you couldn't even buy Media Center edition retail. There's plenty to complain about, but most of the bitching on this last page seems based in parroting internet memes.
Everything you said is totally true and as impartial as I can imagine anyone being. Also, honestly, it's about fucking time Apple got their portable lineup (mostly) together and had decent (read: usable) graphics across the board and started shipping everything with *enough* RAM.
Also, whoever at Apple was designing the internals of these machines from 2001-2006 needs to be shot. Even a seemingly simple machine like a G5 PowerMac was a BITCH to work on, and the Mac Pro FINALLY came along and fixed EVERYTHING. Same deal for the iBook -> MacBook transition.
I can tell you that every tech at Apple breathed a huge sigh of relief upon seeing the tech guides for every new machine since 2006, and even more so in the last year. Apple's finally making killer machines again.
Oh, and for the record, I got an iBook just before the whole Quartz Extreme bullshit thing, and I got a MacBook literally 20 days prior to the Core2Duo (from Core Duo) upgrade. I'm glad I have nothing to be furious about with my new MBPro.
The point of the matter isn't "Vista Home isn't any worse than XP Home," it's "Vista Home is drastically worse than OS X or most any Linux distro."
Windows has lost TREMENDOUS home user marketshare over the last few years, and if Microsoft wants to lure people back away from Linux/OS X (their only real pool to draw from, really), they need to be competitive to THOSE users, too.
And I'm pretty sure plenty of people complained about the same things under XP. Isn't that why NO ONE uses XP Home? Just like people avoid Vista Basic like the plague?
So... I'm with you on that, but comparing the pricing of Home Premium retail to XP Home or OS X is inconsistent.
I think the price comparison is stupid and pointless, though, I'm mainly just talking about usability and feature set. A good OS can cost money. I'm cool with paying for important things. $100? $200? $300? Doesn't matter as much as the quality and the feature set.
Now, that doesn't mean I want to be nickeled and dimed for the features I need just so that Microsoft can list a low base price in their commercials.
Doesn't make much difference in the end, though; Home Basic is still shit and should have never existed in the first place.
That'll work.
But seriously. The idea that people need so many versions at so many price points is just stupid. There's no good argument to support it, and if you have one, you're wrong. What Microsoft needs to learn is how to make one OS with everything, but keep the less commonly used stuff shuffled away from Grandma Jeanie who just wants solitaire. Get ballsy and chop down your product line with a machete.
But they won't do that. Not in my lifetime, anyway. Not with Balmer at the helm.
But I'd be happy for them to prove me wrong, though.
Besides Ballmer being too stuck in his ways to do this, the first person in the US or EU to complain about not being able to use a feature (like AD connectivity) and MS either has to say that feature has no value (which is a slippery slope) or governments (especially the EU) force multiple editions anyway (like Win N editions).
That's the downside of having abused a monopoly in the past decade or two; Microsoft often can't do what makes sense, as minority complaints need to be given more weight, unlike for a company like Apple. The company is legally bound to make decisions that appeal to everyone in the entire world.
That's a good point. The only issue is that I don't think Ballmar sees "having to appeal to everyone in the entire world" as a downside. He has this jack-of-all-trades/master-of-nothing mentality that causes Microsoft to do lots of things half-assed. I mean, have you heard the guy talk? He THINKS Microsoft is the most innovative, admired brand in every sector in which they compete.
At least Jobs has the balls to admit that their foray into home theatre left a lot to be desired.
I hope someone like Ray Ozzie gets Ballmer's job sooner rather than later. Ballmer seems to have good business sense and all, but only where it's *completely* untempered by appreciation for things that aren't cold, hard facts (like customer needs, until they're affecting sales).
I agree 100%.
That said, the poor reception for Vista kind of woke MS up to that whole "customer needs" blind spot. Might turn out to be the best thing that's happened to the company since IBM bungling their business model.
Yeah the case I described might be special, but if you spend _additional_ money for an IMO expensive product (license), you could at least expect more flexibility and more basic functionality. It isn't the case that the translation have to be made especially for me, they had to be created anyway because MS operates in different countries. - and the translations are already on the disc. Even an option to swap the language afterwards, after online-activation or verification would be nice, so their windows genuie (sp?) would be actually useful for the csm. But no, I had to borrow the install media from somewhere else, in order to get the language I wanted.
Yes, I consider translation / multiple languages a very basic functionality, but maybe thats just my priorities speaking here.
If I'm paying $230 for the Ultimate version now, and will keep that OS for the next 3-4 years until I upgrade my computer, that's not that bad of an investment even if someone does consider it "overpriced". Keeping a Gold XBox Live account costs more than Home Premium..
What kind of inputs does the tv have?
Nor am I a fan of OS-X's incremental updates that you get to pay for.
Just to chime in on the largely meaningless debate over operating system cost.
You know what else sucks? Fucking oil changes.
OSX "point releases" aren't any different than, say, Windows 2000->XP (NT 5.0->5.1) or Windows Vista -> 7 (NT 6.0-6.1).
Yes.
Some things cost money.
Yes.
Anyone getting the point yet? If you want windows or OS-X, then, as with any software that costs money (for those of us who fit between the brackets of 'law abiding' and 'law fearing') you have to pay for it.
Both operating systems are closely enough priced that paying for them only matters in the relative sense that there are other operating systems that you don't have to pay for. Which makes the debate in the last page or two largely meaningless.
It's not exactly the same thing. MS gives updates for the life of the OS, which is several years, as part of the price. These updates include back ported functionality. Windows 2000 got compatibility mode (one of the few things I can remember off the top of my head). And Vista will be getting code base & kernel updates from Windows 7.
You know Apple does this, too, right? 10.4.11 came out after Leopard launched. A similar example exists for most every OS X update.
I pay a guy to do mine because I don't like fucking with my car. Good thing I'm a Mac user. =]
Actually it would, just in a different way.
He's a good guy. Crazy Russian dude that I suspect drinks on the job. A lot.
Wait... Going Mac, what?