OS X Snow Leopard

From OSX to iPods, iTunes to Mac Minis, and all other things Apple.

Moderators: David, Thresher

OS X Snow Leopard

Postposted on Mon Apr 06, 2009 8:52 pm

i'm new to mac (just buying a new Macbook Pro 15" and completely happy) but am confused with the Kernel updates.

i have Leopard and am curious, do i have to buy each Kernel update like "Snow Leopard"? or can i just download it as an update for free? it would get mighty expensive if i had to do that every year or so. i'm hoping its the Free route....

thanks,
Murso
Murso24
Gerbil First Class
 
Posts: 125
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2007 8:20 pm
Location: Aurora, IL

Re: OS X Snow Leopard

Postposted on Mon Apr 06, 2009 9:05 pm

It's not free.
Skrying
Gerbil Jedi
 
Posts: 1792
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 1:37 am
Location: Missouri

Re: OS X Snow Leopard

Postposted on Mon Apr 06, 2009 9:07 pm

do you have to basically "re-install" the OS as the new update? instead of like a Service Pack?
Murso24
Gerbil First Class
 
Posts: 125
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2007 8:20 pm
Location: Aurora, IL

Re: OS X Snow Leopard

Postposted on Mon Apr 06, 2009 9:14 pm

Murso24 wrote:do you have to basically "re-install" the OS as the new update? instead of like a Service Pack?


It works similar to a Windows upgrade. All your files will remain intact. The upgrades generally cost $129 on release.
Skrying
Gerbil Jedi
 
Posts: 1792
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 1:37 am
Location: Missouri

Re: OS X Snow Leopard

Postposted on Mon Apr 06, 2009 9:18 pm

ok..thanks!

(btw. that does not discourage me from using Mac or upgrading at all)
Murso24
Gerbil First Class
 
Posts: 125
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2007 8:20 pm
Location: Aurora, IL

Re: OS X Snow Leopard

Postposted on Mon Apr 06, 2009 9:26 pm

They haven't officially released pricing/availability info just yet (or even a date) but I expect that everything Skyring wrote will be the case with Snow Leotard.
I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do, I do not do. But what I hate, I do.
derFunkenstein
Gerbil God
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 21337
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2003 9:13 pm
Location: WHAT?

Re: OS X Snow Leopard

Postposted on Mon Apr 06, 2009 9:30 pm

Murso24 wrote:ok..thanks!

(btw. that does not discourage me from using Mac or upgrading at all)


You must have deep pockets. $129.99 for an update? Kiss my ass. $9.99 for my iPod Touch's update? Kiss it some more. Greedy fruit heads.
i5 2500K @ 4.5GHz / Cooler Master V8 / Asus P8P67 Evo / 8GB G.skill DDR3-1600 / MSI GTX 560 Ti / Seasonic S12-650 / 1TB Spinpoint F3 / Corsair 600T Graphite / those cheap 1440p Korean monitors
BoBzeBuilder
Graphmaster Gerbil
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 1191
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2005 8:43 pm
Location: Beerland

Re: OS X Snow Leopard

Postposted on Mon Apr 06, 2009 9:31 pm

no. i just think if the update is worth it to make a great OS even better..why not? though 129.99 is a bit steep, im willing to shell that out.
Murso24
Gerbil First Class
 
Posts: 125
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2007 8:20 pm
Location: Aurora, IL

Re: OS X Snow Leopard

Postposted on Tue Apr 07, 2009 12:10 am

BoBzeBuilder wrote:
Murso24 wrote:ok..thanks!

(btw. that does not discourage me from using Mac or upgrading at all)


You must have deep pockets. $129.99 for an update? Kiss my ass. $9.99 for my iPod Touch's update? Kiss it some more. Greedy fruit heads.


Eh, point releases for OS X are one of the few areas I don't have much problem with Apple charging for. Consider that the last four (including 10.6) have all been spaced about two years apart and the $129 isn't that bad anymore. I wish more focus would be on new features and underlying technologies given to pure updates. Snow Leopard represents some pretty large technical changes for OS X. Compare this to what you'll be paying to go from Windows Vista to Windows 7 where much of what you'll see is the exact same except highly refined, much more stable, feature completely and all around improved. As a company you must at some point determine what point you need to release a new product and when something is an update. You see this all the time in iLife, Microsoft Office, Adobe Photoshop, etc, etc.
Skrying
Gerbil Jedi
 
Posts: 1792
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 1:37 am
Location: Missouri

Re: OS X Snow Leopard

Postposted on Tue Apr 07, 2009 1:16 am

BoBzeBuilder wrote:You must have deep pockets. $129.99 for an update? Kiss my ass. $9.99 for my iPod Touch's update? Kiss it some more. Greedy fruit heads.

$130 every two years is a lot better than $300 every 3 years (XP was unusually long-lived for a Microsoft OS). Especially since each OS X update has introduced major improvements while people tend to fight a Windows release for 2 years or so.
Core i7 920, 3x2GB Corsair DDR3 1600, 80GB X25-M, 1TB WD Caviar Black, MSI X58 Pro-E, Radeon 4890, Cooler Master iGreen 600, Antec P183, opticals
SNM
Emperor Gerbilius I
 
Posts: 6206
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2005 10:37 am

Re: OS X Snow Leopard

Postposted on Tue Apr 07, 2009 9:48 am

The misconception is that a "point release" in OS X is on par with a "service pack" in Windows. It's really not even close.
I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do, I do not do. But what I hate, I do.
derFunkenstein
Gerbil God
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 21337
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2003 9:13 pm
Location: WHAT?

Re: OS X Snow Leopard

Postposted on Tue Apr 07, 2009 11:27 am

derFunkenstein wrote:The misconception is that a "point release" in OS X is on par with a "service pack" in Windows.



Who even thinks that? Its quite obvious that thats not true.
(\_/)
(O.o)
(''')(''')
Wounded Warrior Project
Watch out for evil Terra-Tron; He Does not like you!
tanker27
Darth Gerbil
 
Posts: 7219
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2002 7:00 pm
Location: Georgia

Re: OS X Snow Leopard

Postposted on Tue Apr 07, 2009 12:41 pm

tanker27 wrote:
derFunkenstein wrote:The misconception is that a "point release" in OS X is on par with a "service pack" in Windows.



Who even thinks that? Its quite obvious that thats not true.


BoBzeBuilder, clearly.
MacUser
Gerbil
 
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:07 pm

Re: OS X Snow Leopard

Postposted on Tue Apr 07, 2009 2:38 pm

tanker27 wrote:
derFunkenstein wrote:The misconception is that a "point release" in OS X is on par with a "service pack" in Windows.



Who even thinks that? Its quite obvious that thats not true.

It's obvious to you and me, and all users of OS X. It's not so obvious to those who intentionally show their ignorance of the matter. And MacUser correctly identified who I was talking about in this instance, but it's happened before.
I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do, I do not do. But what I hate, I do.
derFunkenstein
Gerbil God
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 21337
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2003 9:13 pm
Location: WHAT?

Re: OS X Snow Leopard

Postposted on Tue Apr 07, 2009 8:55 pm

Example: 10.5.6

The first set, "10" is the main "master" OS. This is the resent OS"X" system. When it goes to 11, the OS will be radically different. Like moving from DOS to NT.

The next set, "5" is the major kernel update. Panther(3), Tiger(4), Leopard(5), Snow Leopard(6). These are what you buy, usually $129.

The next and last set, "6" is the updates to the system. The same as taking a group of windows updates and dumping them into a single update.

Hope this helps.
i7-2600k (4.1Ghz), 16GB DDR3-1600, 6970 2GB, GA-Z68X-UD3H-B3, Recon3D Audio (PCI-E), WD 1TB Black (os/programs), WD 2TB Green (games), WD 3TB Green (movies/music), Win 8.1 Pro x64
Check out my site for trance mixes and other goodies! linserv.biz.tm
ClickClick5
Gerbil XP
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 455
Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2008 8:28 pm
Location: Somewhere in a land the doctor says does not exist...

Re: OS X Snow Leopard

Postposted on Tue Apr 07, 2009 10:38 pm

Mac OS X 10.0 -> 10.1 ~6 months (Free upgrade to existing 10.0 owners)
10.1 -> 10.2 ~11 months ($129)
10.2 -> 10.3 ~14 months ($129)
10.3 -> 10.4 ~18 months ($129)
10.4 -> 10.5 ~30 months ($129)
Total OS upgrade cost: $516

Windows XP Pro -> Vista Ultimate ~69 months ($185 upgrade)
Total OS upgrade cost: $185

This is all within the same stretch of time pretty much.

There are no apples to apples comparisons, they are just two very different release models but it should help put things into perspective. With Apple you pay for these enhancements along the way, with windows you don't, though one could easily say you get more with the Apple releases.

Taking a look at the enhancements to these releases some of them can be extremely weak. Safari enhancements? iChat enhancements? Quicktime updates? Spotlight? All have counterparts in the windows world that are updated constantly, for free.

Windows XP updates brought some fairly big things too over its lifetime, though Apple isn't second fiddle in that regard.

At any rate, I don't think anyone from either camp kept their same computer through the above timeline. The Apple folks would have bought a couple of systems during that time that simply came with the OS included, normal Windows users would have done the same.

I guess the only real difference is with Windows you can have the updated features as they are available and don't have to either pay $130 or wait until you need a new computer to get it. Though the big releases are going to cost you. Now if only Microsoft would match the OS pricing scheme...
Tachyonic Karma: Future decisions traveling backwards in time to smite you now.
Convert
Grand Gerbil Poohbah
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 3111
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2003 6:47 am

Re: OS X Snow Leopard

Postposted on Tue Apr 07, 2009 11:29 pm

tanker27 wrote:
derFunkenstein wrote:The misconception is that a "point release" in OS X is on par with a "service pack" in Windows.



Who even thinks that? Its quite obvious that thats not true.


Personally I think the incremental point releases in OS X are somewhere in-between that of a new OS and Service Pack. They often add some new features and under the hood improvements but so too have Microsoft with their service packs. I do believe the pricing structure of OS X and a Microsoft OS are different and this is how you pay for ongoing support. Personally I would be happy enough to go along with this if Apple were to support older versions of OS X for longer. Perhaps the latest and greatest and continued support for the previous two versions. Right now I don't believe its anything near that.
FDISK /MBR
Dirge
Gerbil Jedi
 
Posts: 1550
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 3:08 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: OS X Snow Leopard

Postposted on Wed Apr 08, 2009 12:28 am

Convert wrote:Mac OS X 10.0 -> 10.1 ~6 months (Free upgrade to existing 10.0 owners)
10.1 -> 10.2 ~11 months ($129)
10.2 -> 10.3 ~14 months ($129)
10.3 -> 10.4 ~18 months ($129)
10.4 -> 10.5 ~30 months ($129)
Total OS upgrade cost: $516

Windows XP Pro -> Vista Ultimate ~69 months ($185 upgrade)
Total OS upgrade cost: $185

This is absolutely true. But, as I said before, XP is an unusually long-lived Microsoft OS, lasting about as long as its previous 3 OSes put together. And with the Vista->Win7 timeline Microsoft is putting teeth behind its warning that it will be returning to that release cycle. Plus the fact that you can skip an OS X version and keep the same pricing on the next one, whereas with Windows, upgrades are only good for one cycle.
Core i7 920, 3x2GB Corsair DDR3 1600, 80GB X25-M, 1TB WD Caviar Black, MSI X58 Pro-E, Radeon 4890, Cooler Master iGreen 600, Antec P183, opticals
SNM
Emperor Gerbilius I
 
Posts: 6206
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2005 10:37 am

Re: OS X Snow Leopard

Postposted on Wed Apr 08, 2009 6:51 am

SNM wrote:Plus the fact that you can skip an OS X version and keep the same pricing on the next one, whereas with Windows, upgrades are only good for one cycle.

With Vista that's true, I think, but with Win7 I bet you'll still be able to upgrade from XP.

Surprise, something from Apple costs more but people are unable to see past the dollar signs and find the true value.
I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do, I do not do. But what I hate, I do.
derFunkenstein
Gerbil God
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 21337
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2003 9:13 pm
Location: WHAT?

Re: OS X Snow Leopard

Postposted on Wed Apr 08, 2009 8:49 am

Upgrade path to Vista: http://www.microsoft.com/windows/window ... tions.aspx

Pretty crappy IMO. Though very few people would run into a situation where they had 2000 and wanted to upgrade to Vista without buying a PC that already had Vista or XP on it. Also there has been talk that you won't be able to upgrade to Windows 7 from XP, which just doesn't make any sense.

derFunkenstein wrote:Surprise, something from Apple costs more but people are unable to see past the dollar signs and find the true value.

Hardly. More like people aren't able to justify the cost given the additions, especially when the competition is able to do similar things for free. With all honesty it seems like fanboys in general think *any* addition automatically makes the attached cost worth it. Doesn't matter what they did or how few of them there were it's a "improvement" and therefore worth whatever the asking price is.

SNM wrote:XP is an unusually long-lived Microsoft OS, lasting about as long as its previous 3 OSes put together. And with the Vista->Win7 timeline Microsoft is putting teeth behind its warning that it will be returning to that release cycle.

Perhaps. At any rate there isn't much use talking about the future with regards to one company only. Who knows what Apple has in store.
Tachyonic Karma: Future decisions traveling backwards in time to smite you now.
Convert
Grand Gerbil Poohbah
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 3111
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2003 6:47 am

Re: OS X Snow Leopard

Postposted on Wed Apr 08, 2009 9:28 am

Two different perspectives, I suppose. I can't discuss it with you because you can't have a rational discussion without lumping people into two groups: fanboys and intelligent people. Lots of folks are buying Macs for the first time, and they certainly don't fall into the first category and since they're obviously spending too much they can't fit into the latter. :roll:
I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do, I do not do. But what I hate, I do.
derFunkenstein
Gerbil God
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 21337
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2003 9:13 pm
Location: WHAT?

Re: OS X Snow Leopard

Postposted on Wed Apr 08, 2009 10:03 am

derFunkenstein wrote: fanboys and intelligent people. Lots of folks are buying Macs for the first time, and they certainly don't fall into the first category and since they're obviously spending too much they can't fit into the latter. :roll:


I am one of these "types". All I can say is I love a Mac, specifically a laptop without all the bloat that comes with owning a windows PC/laptop. Sure Windows "CAN" do what I am doing on a Mac but not without the overhead and bloat.

"Do I really need 46 processes running in the background just to burn a DVD?"

"I game on a PC. I WORK on a Mac."™ - Tanker27

Now thats a tag line you can take to the bank.
(\_/)
(O.o)
(''')(''')
Wounded Warrior Project
Watch out for evil Terra-Tron; He Does not like you!
tanker27
Darth Gerbil
 
Posts: 7219
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2002 7:00 pm
Location: Georgia

Re: OS X Snow Leopard

Postposted on Wed Apr 08, 2009 10:33 am

Who really cares how many processes are running if the system works fine? Also it's really not a tag line you can take to the bank because it's just not true for a large number of people.

As long as you don't have to buy each point release from apple and can just upgrade when you need the upgrade or new feature then it really doesn't have a cost difference from MSFT.
tfp
Grand Gerbil Poohbah
 
Posts: 3070
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2003 11:09 am

Re: OS X Snow Leopard

Postposted on Wed Apr 08, 2009 11:03 am

Hey-

I think the difference in "bloat" as described here is a poor point of comparison. Better to look at actual system resources available because my experience has always been that OSX has many things running under its umbrella that both XP and Vista have running as individual services. Do two equally/competitively hardware-configured systems (desktop or laptop) have similar available system resources with equally/competitively configured OS's? I expect that they will be similar.

I am ignoring the "bloat"-ware that comes with an off-the-shelf Windows computer... that stuff is truly bloat and exists to bring the cost of the system down through what could be considered unfair marketting practices. Personally, I would pay a few dollars more to be free of that stuff... which I guess I do since I build my own PC and we buy Apples (internal monologue made into external rambling)

For the passionate ones, this isn't a judgement... just a comment.
-Eric

Please don't quote me on this.
ericfulmer
Gerbil XP
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 352
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 7:43 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Re: OS X Snow Leopard

Postposted on Wed Apr 08, 2009 11:30 am

tfp wrote:As long as you don't have to buy each point release from apple and can just upgrade when you need the upgrade or new feature then it really doesn't have a cost difference from MSFT.

And this is a big point - you don't have to buy them. Tiger is still supported pretty heavily and if you have a pre-Tiger PPC system (which is something from pre-April 2005), it's probably time to upgrade hardware if you need something in Leopard anyway. Apple offers all of its software for Tiger with the exception of iLife 09 (which absolutely requires not just Leopard, but 10.5.6). That includes all the pro apps, iWork, and iTunes.

Also, $129 is the MSRP, not the actual going price. It also gets cheaper per computer if you're upgrading between 2-5 machines (as little as $29 per computer, and no more than $72).

Family packs are awesome. MSRP is $200 but they go for about $150. If you have even 2 Macs you're upgrading, the cost of the OS goes WAY down per computer. The Mac Box Set is an even better deal if you're upgrading, as it's only $180 for the family pack which makes it $36-ish for 5 computers, or $90 per computer, and that includes iLife and iWork in addition to OS X.

Upgrade pricing arguments are retarded. Microsoft doens't really come close.
I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do, I do not do. But what I hate, I do.
derFunkenstein
Gerbil God
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 21337
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2003 9:13 pm
Location: WHAT?

Re: OS X Snow Leopard

Postposted on Wed Apr 08, 2009 1:11 pm

Derfunk, $129 is the going price when a new release comes out. Of course two year old software drops in price, Apples is no different. I'd also suggest if you want a rational discussion you don't use entirely subjective terms such as "true value" that only mean something to you and no one else. That's where the Apple arguments always fall down, when the only defense is ill worded or some unprovable value-add and when the offensive is from people who've never even used a Mac. Just entire break downs on both sides because everyone is being reasonable. This is why I tend to argue on the point of hardware cost and hardware options, something entirely provable.

As for resource usage. Not a valid argument. OS X and Windows both handle what is available to them extremely well. Even the much bashed Vista is really rather efficient, not to mention Windows 7 is even more so. There are tons of background processes running on all OSes for numerous purposes.
Skrying
Gerbil Jedi
 
Posts: 1792
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 1:37 am
Location: Missouri

Re: OS X Snow Leopard

Postposted on Wed Apr 08, 2009 1:29 pm

It's not brain science - the true value is going to be maybe one part subjective, but lots more parts in terms of features added. It's probably going to be different for everyone, which is why it means something different to me than it does to someone else (although surely, everyone places a value on features they use and the time those features save, right?)
I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do, I do not do. But what I hate, I do.
derFunkenstein
Gerbil God
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 21337
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2003 9:13 pm
Location: WHAT?

Re: OS X Snow Leopard

Postposted on Wed Apr 08, 2009 6:16 pm

derFunkenstein wrote:I can't discuss it with you because you can't have a rational discussion without lumping people into two groups: fanboys and intelligent people. Lots of folks are buying Macs for the first time, and they certainly don't fall into the first category and since they're obviously spending too much they can't fit into the latter. :roll:

I bought a macbook. It goes to bed with me every night. I won't be owning two Mac's at the same time but I have every intention of buying a new one in the future. What does that make me (besides a technosexual monogamist)?

The point you miss in all of this is that a person can buy irrationally but accept that they have done so instead of irrationally defending the product and or purchase. I am sure the majority of the Apple fanboys are intelligent, if it is any consolation I think you are. But don't get me wrong, I am not saying a Apple purchase = an irrational purchase.
Tachyonic Karma: Future decisions traveling backwards in time to smite you now.
Convert
Grand Gerbil Poohbah
Gold subscriber
 
 
Posts: 3111
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2003 6:47 am

Re: OS X Snow Leopard

Postposted on Mon Jun 01, 2009 8:14 am

So are we going to see this thing get released next week?

Seems like we have been waiting forever for it!
8)
(\_/)
(O.o)
(''')(''')
Wounded Warrior Project
Watch out for evil Terra-Tron; He Does not like you!
tanker27
Darth Gerbil
 
Posts: 7219
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2002 7:00 pm
Location: Georgia

Re: OS X Snow Leopard

Postposted on Mon Jun 01, 2009 8:16 am

SNM wrote:
BoBzeBuilder wrote:You must have deep pockets. $129.99 for an update? Kiss my ass. $9.99 for my iPod Touch's update? Kiss it some more. Greedy fruit heads.

$130 every two years is a lot better than $300 every 3 years (XP was unusually long-lived for a Microsoft OS). Especially since each OS X update has introduced major improvements while people tend to fight a Windows release for 2 years or so.


Anyone who pays full retail price for an MS OS is dumb.
MadManOriginal
Graphmaster Gerbil
 
Posts: 1424
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2002 7:00 pm
Location: In my head...

Next

Return to Apple Sanctuary

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests