Apple has to be joking

but it's not just security patches...

We'll, if they're justifying the price because of the few features they've added, then why aren't they planning on releasing security patches for previous OS X versions?

*chortle*

I can certainly imagine, lol... MS does all sorts of other shenanigans with regards to licensing, security and forced software upgrades. IE not being developed anymore, you have to use (buy) MSN, for example? Or the bit in the EULA where they can control your computer and you have to clear it with them to upgrade your equipment or you can't use your software?

Apple isn't run by aliens, you know, they are as capable of needing profits as the next big company to survive.

mairving wrote: Imagine if Microsoft tried charging $129 for security patches like Apple is doing.

Oh I dunno... Didn't they charge for Win98SE?

I have an Apple Ibook for just over a year. I have upgraded the OS from Mac OS X 10.2 - OS X 10.3, they was going to charge me £130 for the upgrade. But then i started to complain when they said that i would have to wait a couple of month for a patch what i need for Final Cut Pro.

So i told then to $%% off. a week later i had a fone call saying that they where sorry for making me wait and the give me the new OS FREE.

So i belive that apple are a good company when it comes down to looking after number one!

Micosoft call you by a number, Apple called me by my first name, then asking me if it was ok to do that!

Its a big war our there, just make sure you have chosen the right side. I have....

APPLE, my the force be with you: lol

Hmmm, I believe Mairving has chosen the right side (and all others who use Linux). It doesn't cost anything to get the OS itself, let alone the upgrades.

The problem for anyone who needs to develop commercial software is everybody uses Micro$coff, so that's what you have to develop for.

This is what Yoda thinks:

Mmmmmm... Used a PC, I did. Yes....

Betrayed, I was! Forced me to release my anger, it did!

Only with a Macintosh can you bring balance to the force

Yoda... my name is. Jedi Master am I.

---

So overall what do you think is best a Mac? or a PC? (What OS?)

IMO, PC hardware gives you the most options. You can do so much with your PC hardware.

OS.. I'm still using winows for my desktops. Linux for my webservers. But I'm wanting to move to linux for my desktop. Mac OS X is basically BSD (unix) with a Mac-ish GUI slapped on top.

There is no perfect OS out there. I use MS for my desktop for a couple of machines. I also use 2K server on 3 servers that I have at work, mostly because they have apps that require them. I also use Linux on 3 servers at work, one for files, one for an Internet Proxy and one for Apache. Sometimes you really have no choice about what to use.

The PC platform certainly is the most upgradable and cheapest out there. Apple annoys me because of the fact that they are so proprietary. I really wish that they would make a OSX port for the PC platform to give MS some competition but they don't. I think because they would rather make money by selling $3000 machines than $100 OS's. I personally believe that MS and Apple have an agreement for Apple not to move to the PC platform.

Linux is definitely the best choice around for servers, even though somethings are way too hard to do in Linux with way too little documentation. The desktop is good but still you have the big problem with programs not being compatible. IBM and Novell both are going to be pushing the desktop on Linux so I expect to see some improvement in this in the future. The problem is that once you achieve compatibility with a program MS has a tendency to change things to render them inoperable.

Anyway I consider this to be a friendly discussion and don't intend to bash Mac users, who seem to be a sensitive lot sometimes.

That's IT Mairving, in the back in 10 minutes, I'm going to show you the error of your ways!

...

Okay, maybe not. I think that Apple would do well to offer a non-hardware option. I'd have purchased it years ago and moved to Apple and then spent more $$ on Apple hardware than I already have because it's so pretty AND I would have had all the software already for it.

I know you can swap out Apple hardware for other things, though. It is all the same hardware, pretty well, eh? It's not like they have a totally different inside using magic or alien technology. It's just that they don't make it easy and keep themselves sane by not having to support umpteen different sound cards, modems, et cetera.

diversity is a requierement for almost any product you buy why isn't that so for OS. I mean when it's time to buy a car would you like only the option of 2 or 4 doors and 3 different colors, even that is more choice then there is now in OS.

Each OS as it's advantage and it's downside.

windows is really good to turn your PC into a gaming console
windows is really bad at anything else

mac is really good a graphical design, and for ease of use
mac is stuck on mac hardware and upgrade every year are costly

linux is good for server and to learn *nix
linux require complete upgrade too often

freebsd is the best os IMO

yes you are probably right being in my terminal all day long i forget about normal users