Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Mac OSX: Cracked for PCs + More Update Woes

Last response: in Tom's Guide
Share
November 2, 2007 9:45:05 AM

Mac OSX Leopard can now run on your PC and you don't even need a Core 2 Duo CPU. And, Apple's handling of the Leopard upgrade continues to tarnish the company's reputation; latest issue: censorship.

http://www.tomsguide.com/us/2007/11/02/mac_osx/index.html
November 2, 2007 10:59:50 AM

Quote:
.....However, in my opinion, the reason is clear: Apple makes a fortune on its computers. If the Mac OS were to suddenly become available for the much more affordable PC, Apple wouldn't sell as many of those high priced computers.....


Your opinion is yours, but not factual. If you try configuring a spec to spec standard configuration computer from another manufacturer you'll find Apple is actually less expensive than DELL, HP, Alienware, BOXX or anyone else that sells pre-built BTO configurable computers.
November 2, 2007 11:13:33 AM

Apple are too expensive....their machines cost way too much for what you get, they seem completely against the custom builder or anyone who knows things about computer. Im going to run Mac osx on my spare hdd to try it out at some point, saving costs on an overpriced mac system.

This code is put in as apple know if they dont have it they wont sell any machines.
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
November 2, 2007 11:27:15 AM

idiokickass said:
Quote:
.....However, in my opinion, the reason is clear: Apple makes a fortune on its computers. If the Mac OS were to suddenly become available for the much more affordable PC, Apple wouldn't sell as many of those high priced computers.....


Your opinion is yours, but not factual. If you try configuring a spec to spec standard configuration computer from another manufacturer you'll find Apple is actually less expensive than DELL, HP, Alienware, BOXX or anyone else that sells pre-built BTO configurable computers.


You're right. I'd like to see a company like Dell selling workstations like Mac Pro at that price... or even an iMac competitor...

These are opinions and reviews from guys who only use ms excel, word, games and overclock pcs... Happy OCing Mr. Reviewer! (at least till you have something important to do in your pc; then in that case, buy a mac)
November 2, 2007 11:34:48 AM

tomdrum said:
Apple are too expensive....their machines cost way too much for what you get, they seem completely against the custom builder or anyone who knows things about computer. Im going to run Mac osx on my spare hdd to try it out at some point, saving costs on an overpriced mac system.

This code is put in as apple know if they dont have it they wont sell any machines.


Knock yourself off
http://forum.osx86scene.com/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=2008&s...
November 2, 2007 1:22:04 PM

When I bought my new laptop I looked at Macbooks as well as the usual suspects. They most definitely were not the most expensive, nor were they less expensive than comparable systems. They actually were pretty darn close to high end laptops from first tier PC vendors, which I didn't expect (I'd assumed they were more expensive).

I ended up with a Dell Precision M90, which had i gotten the same loadout would have been almost the same price as the comparable Mac (around $2500). It ended up a thousand more after upgrades I wanted (that I couldn't get on the Mac), but the Mac was right in the running.
November 2, 2007 1:50:16 PM

Isn't it obvious? If OS X could be installed on any PC hardware, people like Dell would step up and make a killing.

Consider the two types of customers Apple has. First, the stereotypical fanboys, who will always buy Apple software and hardware, exclusively. There's just no helping these people--they're willing to pay through the nose for more clean-looking hardware, and that's their right I suppose.

The second type of customer, whom Apple is increasingly trying to appeal to, is the same sort who purchase Dell machines. They simply don't care about "geek stuff". They don't need to know how fast their processor is, they simply need a box that can work. They like Dell because they can get their computers for cheap, and they like Apple because OS X is simpler for them.

If OS X could be installed on any PC, Apple would lose their second customer type. If you can buy a $400 eMachine or Dell with a cheap display, mouse, keyboard, printer and speakers which runs OS X, it should satisfy you in all ways--it's cheap, and it runs OS X, and frankly it's not worth hundreds of dollars more to go over to Apple hardware just so you can look at aluminum rather than painted metal and plastic bezels.

That, and if OS X had to support millions of combinations of CPUs, GPUs, motherboards, and add-in cards, you'd see the same unexpected errors popping up that you do in Windows with its nigh infinite varieties of configurations. Some feature that a motherboard provides would turn out to be incompatible with an SLI-setup using a particular graphics driver, stuff like that--the sort of unfortunate things us Windows users have to deal with, but the ultimate price of having a free computer market. OS X would then lose some of its reputation as being amazingly stable and bug-free... the only way to get the full OS X experience would be to sell your computing soul to the Devil and get Apple's OS and hardware, forgoing choice for convenience.
November 2, 2007 1:55:16 PM

Yea, there's a huge OS advantage to controlling the hardware permutations the OS will see. I expect once folks start installing OSX on normal PC's they're going to find a LOT of issues that Mac hardware owners will never see.

November 2, 2007 1:58:26 PM

Apple needs to have a desktop mid-tower with desktop ram. Not just a mini that is a over priced laptop in a small case or a mac pro with FB-DIMMS and 2 server cpus.
November 2, 2007 2:53:49 PM

I've bought a used G4 for a steal, $200 but after upgrading it with legitimate, which ironically Apple doesn't support, components has cost me the same price as a new iMac! or a very decent PC upgrade! Never again, Apple. I just got Tiger and iLife 'o6 3 months ago thinking iLife '07 won't come and iLife '08 would come in 2008, not this year!! I can't believe Apple is charging a minor update as if it was a new OS after only 2 years, iPhone price drop in only a season, and no upgrade pricing for past hardware and software owners. That 1984 commercial really belongs to Microsoft, they are the ones allowing 3rd party driver developers, licensing hardware manufactures to creatively use their APIs and REAL academic pricing of their products!!!

What do I see in the distance? Look, it's Microsoft swinging the hammer.

Diversity is creativity. Uniformity is isolationistic and downsizing which in business means buy me or my followers will save me (throw money at me).
November 2, 2007 3:28:48 PM

I don't see a problem.
You pay good money for OSX. You run it on a PC which the software is not designed for and it doesn't run well.
As D_Kuhn: said. a non-mac PC will have problems you can't imagine (even if it does work). The OS works on only a small number of video-cards (mostly sucky ones), etc etc,
So, Apple should just let anyone buy the OSX and just not support it on non-macs. Apple will still have a good image of appliance-like computers because no-one will think of putting Vista on a Mac (unless you like throwing money away).
November 2, 2007 3:30:55 PM

Please...

Why all the complaining??? Apple has ALWAYS done things this way, they are not known for giving much away at all, so why are people now surprised that Leopard has a "small" upgrade window? Furthermore, I work and am friends with people who work for Apple or are Apple fans, and some who also are Apple foes and i can't think of anyone on either side who was surprised at all with the upgrade window, most thought it was to wide.... Yet if you read Tomshardware.com (which i do almost hourly lol) you would think that there is some sort of revolt which is just not true, its sensational journalism, nothing more...

Regarding pricing, Apple commands a premium from some of its hardware that certain groups of people are willing to pay. However, they are also extremely competative within some segments as well. Their clean cut hardware is tough to beat and the machine just works, they also make absolutely awesome monitors as well. The mac pro is geared towards graphics and video production type clients and the hardware software works great together (my company has a number of MacPros) and the people who use them swear by them. The mac pro is not a "home" desktop computer and its not priced to be that either. Back to Leapord again on pricing, 129 is a great price for the ONLY version... Compare that to Microsoft; Leapord is a steal.... And with these individuals who are porting it to "normal" PCs i expect the cost to go up since Apple's profits lie more in the hardware.

I also expect Apple to quickly patch this hole, and besides... Leopard doesn't use BIOS or an MBR disc so how they got this to work.... I smell some pretty big legal rumblings out of Cupertino soon....

Jeff
November 2, 2007 4:05:44 PM

idiokickass said:
Your opinion is yours, but not factual. If you try configuring a spec to spec standard configuration computer from another manufacturer you'll find Apple is actually less expensive than DELL, HP, Alienware, BOXX or anyone else that sells pre-built BTO configurable computers.


It's may be true if you look at initial purchase, but even current PC OEMs like DELL and HP and such allows for a certain level of post-sale DIY customization. You can even try and match the specs with online retailers and build your own machines - you might not beat the price, but chances are you will reuse at least the Power Supply and the Case, DVD drives, maybe your HD if you choose to upgrade. A typical low end pricing would be ($50CDN for the PSU and case, $25-40 for the DVD, and $100 for the HD)

If you do look from the first purchase of the computer, and upgrades over the years to somewhat keep pace, you will find that anything below a Mac Pro isn't terribly customizable. The innards of an iMac feels more like a laptop than a desktop to me.
November 2, 2007 4:21:53 PM

Quote:
Your opinion is yours, but not factual. If you try configuring a spec to spec standard configuration computer from another manufacturer you'll find Apple is actually less expensive than DELL, HP, Alienware, BOXX or anyone else that sells pre-built BTO configurable computers.

What are you talking about? I went to Apple's site and Dell.com and configured a 2.0ghz laptop w/ 1 GB 667mhz RAM, 80 GB HDD, and DVD ROM/CD-RW drive and the price was $1200 for the Mac, $1000 for the Dell. That's 20% more on my first try. I'd compare the desktops, but Apple doesn't make "normal" desktops, and Dell doesn't make any all in one systems. (Which I find to be con's for both Apple and Dell).

However, if you compare a Macbook Pro or Mac Pro with a similiar Dell, the price is about the same. Unfortunately, the Mac's don't offer many hardware options, so spec for spec the price is similiar, but with a Dell you can get a cheaper and less powerful model if you want (or a better, more expensive one if you wish).

Also, Apple does not even offer a cheap laptop or desktop. So if you don't need a PC with much power (which is most people), then you end up paying a lot more for a Mac simply because you don't have a choice.


Long story short, if you don't need a PC with the power for serious photo/video editing, then a Mac is much more expensive.
November 2, 2007 5:07:03 PM

jeffro01 said:
Please...

Why all the complaining??? Apple has ALWAYS done things this way, they are not known for giving much away at all, so why are people now surprised that Leopard has a "small" upgrade window?

Regarding pricing, Apple commands a premium from some of its hardware that certain groups of people are willing to pay. However, they are also extremely competative within some segments as well. Their clean cut hardware is tough to beat and the machine just works, they also make absolutely awesome monitors as well. The mac pro is geared towards graphics and video production type clients and the hardware software works great together (my company has a number of MacPros) and the people who use them swear by them. The mac pro is not a "home" desktop computer and its not priced to be that either. Back to Leapord again on pricing, 129 is a great price for the ONLY version... Compare that to Microsoft; Leapord is a steal.... And with these individuals who are porting it to "normal" PCs i expect the cost to go up since Apple's profits lie more in the hardware.


I guess people just expect more. Even Microsoft had more than just a few weeks before Vista's release in which they gave away Vista vouchers with new XP computers. I mean, maybe Apple didn't break any promises about updating 10.4 users to Leopard (or maybe they did, I don't know) but they're not even living up to their own standards. Apple tends to do the "complete overhaul" approach, where they periodically put out a number of new hardware features and changes, with simultaneous price cuts and form factor shrinks, and software updates if appropriate... here's a case where they could've easily said "You bought one of the new Fall '07 Macs, and though we would've liked to have Leopard out by now, working on the iPhone delayed it so we couldn't ship the new OS with the new hardware... to make it up to you, we're including free (minus packaging and shipping) upgrade vouchers to everyone who bought one of the new Macs." But... they didn't. Which is even more unacceptable when you consider that a great many OS X "features" are behind-the-scenes OS changes or simple updates to bundled software (DVD player app can skip forwards and back 5 seconds with the push of a button, and can be set to always stay on top of other windows... two new features!), the sort of which are typically free in Windows service packs and standard performance updates and bug fixes. But no, if you want what should be patched and updated for free, you've gotta dish out an extra $130 because you bought your Mac a day too early!

So yeah... Leopard is a steal, from consumers.

And let's not forget that because you can only install Leopard on Mac hardware, and Mac hardware always ships with an OS, every copy of Leopard is essentially an Upgrade copy. Don't compare Leopard "upgrade" pricing to stand-alone Vista copies.
November 2, 2007 5:30:51 PM

Apple does make some decent mid-range stuff... but definitely they're most competitive at the high end. You can probably find lots of 1000 PC's that stack up well against the least expensive Mac's, but where they're strong is on the high end, and their prices are competitive at that level.
November 2, 2007 5:50:24 PM

Who writes this stuff for Tom's ??

Man, they really need to get a clue or stop being so anti-Apple.

1. Read what you agree to before you install the OS - duh!! You violate that agreement if you install it on a non-Apple certified hardware. You moan and groan all you like, but it's pretty clear what you agree to when you install the OS.

2. What is new about this info?? OS X could be install on PC's long before Leopard was released.

3. Leopard has some bugs, and Vista doesn't? Care to do a real validated bug list comparision between Vista and Leopard?? No, thought not -- just more inaccurate reporting and obvious display of bias.

4. Leopard is 10.5 -- Tiger is 10.4 -- this is .1 updated not a new OS.

5. It's not a "special chip", it's in the EFI (its updateable firmware) so be very careful if you use Software Update feature of OS X and they do release firmware updates and this are most likely going to destroy your hacked computer.

6. The price of a Mac is actually a good deal when you compare oranges to orange components -- but of course no one does. But yeah, it's really Apple's advantage to over price their computers so that fewer people will buy them -- OMG, does any writing this article actually have a brain?

November 2, 2007 7:16:48 PM

Nope.

But seriously, I have no problem with Mac hardware or software. I just can't stand the snobby attitudes of the Mac users I've known. And it would seem that Apple, as a company, is pretty snobby as well.
November 2, 2007 7:27:15 PM

Yea, osx86 has been around for a while now. I don't know how much clout Apple's lawyers would have against a project like this because they aren't really hacking the operating system. They're creating a boot loader using the same opensource BSD kernel that Apple created along with the open source community, Darwin. They are then tying it in with a previous Tiger install to pull any drivers that the community has written to enable Leopard.

I don't think the fact that censoring negative comments about Leopard is surprising either. I'm sure Microsoft had done the same thing on their own sites when talking about Vista. Microsoft even artificially inflated the number of Vista operating systems that were sold in the first week of release to make it look "popular." Apple is trying to get people to buy more of the same. Look at my new operating system, it's now got 3 new things! I think in this day and age justifying any costs for things like that will get increasingly difficult, aside from including it on a new machine purchase.

Finally I think what a previous poster here was dead on. If you could run OSX on any hardware out there, Apple would loose a lot of money. The PC laptop and desktop market is still the bread and butter of the company. If they lost that influx of cash, that would really hurt the company. Microsoft is primarily a software company, so they really have nothing to loose if you run Windows on a Mac. I'm sure it's helped them sell to the 5% demographic that Apple maintains with the Intel switch.
November 2, 2007 8:14:22 PM

I have not done an officially "snobbery" survey of PC vs. Mac so I wouldn't know -- and don't care. But my unofficial snob meter suggests snobs are alive and well on both platforms but considering there are 800+ million PCs vs. about 30 million Macs, the odds that there ARE numerically more snobs in the PC world (defined as Windows/Vista). Considering the price of Vista Ultimate, I'd dare say PC owners probably have more money which can increase the snobbery factor -- but there again snobbery alone doesn't demissed an OS nor the hardware that OS runs on.

No, Apples bread and butter is not computer sales, it's iPod and is projected to be iPhone next year. Bare in mind that Mac owners on average replace their Mac every 5 years, PC owners every 2 years. So no, Mac hardware is not their bread and butter -- Probably why Steve Jobs dropped "Apple Computer" to just "Apple".

November 2, 2007 9:14:37 PM

V8VENOM said:
Considering the price of Vista Ultimate, I'd dare say PC owners probably have more money which can increase the snobbery factor -- but there again snobbery alone doesn't demissed an OS nor the hardware that OS runs on.


Alright, so we're going to measure the "snobbery factor" based on the cost of the OS? Well let's see... XP service packs are free and Vista Ultimate upgrade is $250... Jaguar, Panther, Tiger and Leopard (10.2, 10.3, 10.4 and 10.5) are $130 apiece which comes out to $520.

Let me emphasize this again. After a 2001 purchase of an XP or OS X (10.0 or 10.1), the cost of keeping your OS current for Microsoft is $250 (or $145, if you're willing to live with "only" Vista Home Premium), and the cost of keeping current for Apple is $520.

By my calculations, that makes Apple users more than twice as snobby as Vista Ultimate users, and more than 3.5 times as snobby as Vista Home Premium users (spending that extra $105 to get Ultimate Extras increases your snobbery factor by a good deal, it seems).

Anybody who's whimpering about the cost of Vista and applauding Apple for putting out $130 versions of OS X should take note of this. Let's pretend you're a cheap Windows user. You get Home Premium upgrade for $145 on Newegg. Now let's pretend you're a cheap Mac user--SO cheap that you lived with your 10.1 box for six years and now feel it's right to upgrade to Leopard. It'll cost you $130 which is a mere $15 cheaper than the cheap Vista user.

And before any of you jump on me and say "HEY! That's not a fair comparison, you can install Leopard on any Mac", think about that statement. What software do Macs always ship with? OS X. What can you install Leopard on? Macs. Every copy of Leopard is an upgrade copy, because in buying your Mac hardware, you've already purchased the previous OS. The comparison you TYPICALLY do is what's unfair--comparing a Mac-hardware-only update to a stand-alone $400 version of Vista Ultimate which can be put on any hardware which you might have pieced together yourself. The cost of entering the Windows world for the first time and using your own hardware configuration of choice is the price difference between Upgrade and non-Upgrade copies of Vista--around $100-150.

This can't be emphasized enough, because apparently most people still don't see the numbers this way. Any time you see somebody spreading misinformation about the $400-500 "cost of Vista" compared to Apple's generous offer of $130 for their latest and greatest, I urge you to stand up and point out the low (on par with Apple's) upgrade costs and the fact that OS X's updates are much more frequent... the end result being that you pay much more to keep up-to-date with OS X than even the most extravagant edition of Vista.
November 2, 2007 9:44:40 PM

A few flaws:

1. Leopard $129 is a Full version -- go install it anywhere you like
2. Leopard does NOT have "Activation"
3. PC users upgrade every 2 years so you actually spend 3X more on hardware in addition to software upgrades as you'll need a separate copy per PC thanks to Windows activation
4. What is unfair? Mac can run OS X and Vista and XP and if you wanna hack a PC it can run OS X (hence the title of this thread)
5. Wanna be entertainers - musicians, mixers, colorist, film makers, photographers rarely start life with good money -- these are the folks buying Macs -- again Windows/Vista wins the snob war there
6. Going from OS X 10.4 to 10.5 does NOT require graphics card upgrades, doesn't require more RAM, and does NOT have any exclusive DX10 graphics API

You're the one NOT comparing the real costs of running Windows/Vista.



November 2, 2007 10:11:05 PM

V8VENOM said:

No, Apples bread and butter is not computer sales, it's iPod and is projected to be iPhone next year. Bare in mind that Mac owners on average replace their Mac every 5 years, PC owners every 2 years. So no, Mac hardware is not their bread and butter -- Probably why Steve Jobs dropped "Apple Computer" to just "Apple".


Obviously you don't follow Apple very closely.

Here's a transcript from a recent NPR broadcast about Apple
Quote:

Apple said Monday it shipped a record 2.16 million Macs in the quarter, an increase of 34 percent from the same period a year ago. That generated $3.1 billion, or about half of the company's revenues for the quarter.


I'd like to see the stats saying PC users upgrade every 2 years. This isn't true. Both operating system users upgrade on the same curve. There are a lot of PC users out there running on 8 year old hardware. I highly doubt you'll see a lot of OS9 folks out there. I'm sure there are some, but they are few and far between.

My problem with Apple as a company is that they lock out certain "features" forcing their users to upgrade. iTunes, Safari, and Quicktime are prime examples. If you're on Panther, 10.3, you have to upgrade the entire OS in order to launch recent versions of iTunes. Apple claims that there are certain functions that only Tiger can accomplish. We all know this is bullshit. So if you're running your old G4 with programs you like, and suddenly buy a new iPod touch, you have to drop another 120 dollars in order to get the thing to work. The same is true for Safari. Thank god Mozilla made Firefox OSX compatible, otherwise legacy users on the Mac would be screwed for modern web content.

Quote:
6. Going from OS X 10.4 to 10.5 does NOT require graphics card upgrades, doesn't require more RAM, and does NOT have any exclusive DX10 graphics API


Actually Leopard does require more hardware resources than Tiger and does need a faster CPU, more memory, and more video. Let's be a bit more balanced with the vista to OSX comparisons as well. OSX 10.1 "Cheetah" came out at about the same time as Windows XP Professional. The hardware requirements on it were relatively low. I would like to see you install Leopard on a machine of that era and see if it runs nice and fast. Microsoft's OS release curve is about 5-7 years, with another 3-4 years extra for support. Try to run the latest and greatest software on Cheetah.
November 2, 2007 10:31:05 PM

iPOD generates 5 Billion -- like I said computer sales is not majority of Apple's revenue and now with the iPhone it will be even less.

What do you think DX10 is?? Microsoft do the same -- only some features available with "activation" (Geniune Microsoft Advantage).

I'll dig up the upgrade cycle stats ... but I can assure you Mac users don't upgrade as frequently as Windows users as OSX doesn't experience anywhere near the bloat in a Microsoft OS.

Nope, check the specs page for 10.4 vs 10.5, they're the same -- sure not for 10.1. 10.4 loads in <20 seconds 10.5 loads in <20 seconds -- can't say that for Vista unless you go into "standby mode".

So what are you saying? Try to run Crysis or Office 2007 on Windows 95 or Windows 98 or Windows ME -- good luck!

But you've ignored the other issues - "activation", DX10, Vista upgrade price not full version price.

Microsoft is King of leverage and locking out features -- even more so with the DRM built into Vista.
November 2, 2007 11:58:02 PM

Apple is without any fault. If you ever plan to upgrade and you're someone who bought a Mac "because it works". I think you will find there is no such thing as something that doesn't have problems.

As Apple sells more and more imachines, igadgets, iwidgets, iphones, ipods, itunes, iwatches, iglasses... they get bigger, bigger, bolder, more egotistical. {IE. The commercials of making fun of windows vista, he needs an update and is going into surgery.}

Meanwhile M$FT says nothing in retalitory against this. Apple is a pipsqueek that wouldn't even be here if it wasn't for M$FT investing life saving funds many years back.

So to the point... if Apple makes such great software then why oh why would this happen??? Read Below...


http://tech.uk.msn.com/news/article.aspx?cp-documentid=...

Quote:
Wednesday, 31 October 2007

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Is Apple's Leopard still in beta?
Even a casual glance across the Mac web in the last few days will reveal a litany of problems faced by users upgrading to Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard.
Quote:


Problems range from application crashes to login problems, lost data and even a Blue Screen of Death (BSOD) - something normally only found in the Windows world.

Of course, any update to a new operating system is fraught with problems - just ask old Mac System 7 users, or Windows Vista users come to that. It's becoming increasingly apparent though that Leopard is causing more than its fair share of problems.

The main issues so far are:

FileVault faults
With Leopard, Apple has introduced a new version of FileVault - the 128-bit file encryption system for Mac OS X. Users of the previous version on Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger have experienced problems when they install Leopard over the top of the old OS.

Apple recommends that you turn off FileVault before you upgrade, but it can take a long time and isn't always practical. Turning off FileVault actually creates an unencrypted duplicate account that you may not have physical space on your hard drive for.

FileVault also doesn't play nicely with Time Machine, Apple's automated back-up program. To back-up a FileVault account you'll have to create an unencrypted account and then log into that to create a Time Machine archive.

Blue Screen Of Death
Thousands of Mac users have experienced an uncharacteristic Blue Screen Of Death (BSOD) when installing Leopard on top of Tiger. Essentially Leopard asks you to reboot once installation is complete, and then your Mac just sits there with the blue logout screen until you force it to reboot. We experienced this for ourselves on our Power Mac G5 install last Friday.

Apple says the problem is caused by 'haxies' - third-party system hacks such as Application Enhancer. Haxie developer Unsanity has in turn hit back at Apple. None of Unsanity's hacks currently work under Leopard. This may be a problem for owners of Logitech mice - Logitech uses Unsanity hacks for Mac OS X installation.

The BSOD problem is so serious, Apple has actually issued a support document on it.

Crashes, performance issues
While many Leopard users are apparently sailing along with no problems at all, others are experiencing problems of nightmare proportions. We have some sympathy with that.

To give you one example, Derrick on the MacObserver forums complains: "I am having no fun so far... my PowerMac G5 Dual 2.0 now crashes repeatedly, drives do not mount... cannot shut down without powering off."

Many of these issues can be resolved by doing a clean install with a fresh batch of system preferences and, of course, by repairing file permissions in Disk Utility. But even that doesn't work for some.

User account problems
Peter D Cox on Apple's Discussion Forums believes some of the problems may be user account related:


"I have flagged a number of issues here: Firefox killed, Notes desktop hanging, Finder crashes, filesyncagent doesn't load, Word doesn't work. Have tried all suggestions including permissions fix, re-installing with archive etc etc. In despair more than inspiration I thought I'd try another user (in this case an admin one) and guess what? No problems."

We've certainly experienced a number of issues with both upgrades and clean installs on both our Power Mac G5 Dual 2.0GHZ desktop and Intel Core 2 Duo MacBook Pro desktop. Some of these are undoubtedly due to non-Leopard compatible applications, but Peter D Cox is right too - we've experienced exactly the kinds of behaviour he writes about. But there's worse. Leopard has now totally hosed two of our user accounts. Find out how in FileVault on Leopard: A Cautionary Tale.

We love you Tiger!
Some Mac users are even beginning to think the unthinkable - to revert back to a previous version of Mac OS X. Some Mac watchers suspect that Apple rushed Leopard out early to hit an arbitrary deadline (the end of October) and haven't fully squashed the many bugs that stopped it from being released in its original time frame of April.

Others argue that the rush to launch actually meant that developers didn't see the final Gold Master version before it shipped, and so weren't able to test compatibility with their apps.

Leopard could now be biting on Apple. It's certainly doing that to many Mac users. As MacObserver forum poster Omacvi writes:

"I truly believe that Apple released this OS too early. I now know and understand what they meant when they delayed it back in April. They have done so much work in the background that it will need extra time to fully fix the bugs. I don't recall reading so many forums with so many issues. I think Apple dropped the ball a little on this OS."

We certainly have never experienced so many problems with a Mac OS X update before - from Cheetah in 2001 to Tiger in 2005, all our upgrades were undogged by the kind of basic problems we're experiencing now. Is Leopard still in beta? It's starting to look like it.


Charma sucks don't it... :bounce: 
November 3, 2007 1:00:24 AM

Anyone who is complaining about Leopard upgrades need to be pointed at and laughed at. They're dumb. They don't deserve anything, and Apple is lucky I'm not running their PR department because I wouldn't respect whiners like that.
November 3, 2007 1:41:56 AM

First, yes Macs are definately overpriced when compared to PC's. Why? Because its about "ease of use" and things working as opposed to pure price/performance. You can argue about it if you will, but you can buy a desktop PC for $350 new and you can get a new laptop for $400-450. You cannot get a new Mac for that.

Second, its a very poor business model Apple has come up with, and I really dont, nor ever will, understand it. As the author mentioned their reasoning is that if they can tie the OS to their $2k computers, they will make more money then if they only got $200 for the OS.

Thats just stupid. Microsoft does NOT manufacture computers, computer parts, or anything like that for PCs. Microsoft does software. People talk all the time about how superior the Mac OS is to Windows(and it probobly is). PC users HATE Microsoft. Yes what Apple makes every year selling $2000 computers is a fraction of what Micorosft makes just selling a $150 OS alone. They have a superior product, a great market for it that wants their product and doesnt want the alternative, the only barrier is that they just arent willing to stop tying it to a computer. PC people will not give up their computers. There is a lot a Mac can do, but it cannot do everything i need it to do, and for that reason, I cant give up my custom built machine, that does what I need it to do.

Apple could clean up the market. They just have to decide to.
November 3, 2007 2:19:39 AM

Then again, the majority of forum members are gamers. You really never see a lot of positive remarks about Macs amongst gamers.
November 3, 2007 2:25:51 AM

Yet another Mac vs PC thread :pfff: 
November 3, 2007 3:52:03 AM

Yeah another one, once again post by people that don't own a Mac -- brilliant. I just love it when people post about hardware they've never own or used daily.

seeker, you want to see the Vista bug list??

The primary difference between Apple and Microsoft is the sheer quantity of bugs -- a record Microsoft have always owned.
November 3, 2007 4:37:17 AM

Both of the links to Apple from this article worked fine this morning. Now, you're required to sign up as a member of the Apple discussion group to view those links. Yet, the rest of the discussion group is still viewable to non members.

Either a monumental coincidence, or they saw the number of hits coming from this article, and made the post and forum in question "members only".
November 3, 2007 4:37:19 AM

Has anyone here forgot what Apple initially was as a company? Apple started as a Computer manufacturer with its own OS. Steve and Jobs b built computers in their garage and ran their OS off of it.

Bill on the other hand wanted to make an OS that will run on every manufacturer's computer whether it was american or korean, he wasn't into selling hardware, just software.

The idea that apple's OS runs only on apple computers has been around since the company was founded. DUH PEOPLE!
if apple is doing anything, it's sticking to it's roots and running it's business like it's always had. Just like Microsoft is doing everything to make sure every hardware manufacturer is running their OS.

Besides, mac hardware is just better. Sure you can claim "Oh I got a $400 emachine", but once the solder on your motherboard cracks or your system screws up due to faulty resistors and other cheap components, you'll think to yourself "perhaps I should have spent a little more money".

Then there's the "My dell is better than your mac"... these people see only 3 things in a computer; Cpu, graphics card, and ram. Mac users may want integrated webcam, built in microphone, quite running and a good heat-sink, a great monitor, built in wireless, built in bluetooth, reliable cpu and ram, a reliable graphics card, and a motherboard or case that makes sense.

A G5 by far has the best inside cable management and hardware placement than any computer on the market, making it an ideal desktop server or workstation. Imacs, best slim design and all in one.

As far as PC fanboys out there, Your system is going to be outdated by next month anyways. constantly buying the latest $400 graphics card or the next $800 cpu. Just how many upgrades did a PC user make to his hardware in the past 4 months?
November 3, 2007 6:16:06 AM

Not to menion the latency problem Vista has with audio -- so count Vista out as being a DAW - 50ms - OMG what were Microsoft thinking.

It is pretty funny how Microsoft OS users somehow think they are more free -- when the reality is Microsoft and it's hardware vendors really have the consumer by the balls.
November 3, 2007 8:24:44 AM

I haven't used the latest Macs, but the previous version did not have a great monitor, the blurring was horrible with movement.

Now for the OS. I have only used Panther and Tiger IIRC (currently Tiger) at school, and both were pretty good, but firefox often crashed in Panther. Before that we used OS9 which was the Apple version of Windows ME. I prefer the interface of XP, but OSX feels less bloated. Vista takes alot of getting used to, which is another advantage of OSX, its pretty much the same in every version. That is also a disadvantage, as you pay alot of money for a (practically) sideways upgrade. Leopard is the first OSX version with any significant visual changes IMO. And don't forget G++ (woo!)
November 3, 2007 12:07:43 PM

I have both Leopard and Vista Ultimate on my MacPro and Leopard is in every way head and shoulders above Vista. Despite its fanfare, Windows is, in my opinion, still the same old clunky operating system it was upon its inception. Windows is very reminiscent of the Wizard of Oz where an all knowing, omnipotent entity turned out to be nothing more than a small person hiding within a façade.
November 3, 2007 4:46:31 PM

Sorry, but how are Mac users so delusional? I love these arguments. "Macs have better hardware!" Ummmm, let me check on that, no. They really don't. They might use better component pairing than the big box boys like HP and Dell, but they don't use better hardware than PCs, they use the same hardware as PCs, STFU. (And I'm pushing myself here to make a differentiation between Mac and PC as Mac is the original PC, grumble grumble.) I guarantee my homebuilt laptop is WAY better than a macbook pro, and was way cheaper, seeing I paid 2K and a similar configuration at the time would have cost around 3500 off of Dell. (Oh my, could it be that pre-builts are overpriced, even apples?)

Second, no, Leopard isn't a full version license, it's an upgrade. It only runs on Macs, all Macs come with an OS, it can be assumed it's being sold as an upgrade. Mac fans will claim it's full version pricing, but it isn't. But convincing an Apple fan otherwise is pointless. What's even funnier is, as was pointed out, Leopard isn't a new OS, it goes from 10.4, to 10.5. It's a service pack! Apple is charging for a service pack! One of the Apple freaks admitted it himself! Granted Microsoft does this as well, as 2000 was really a service pack of NT4, and XP was a service pack of 2000, but none the less, I'm not here to argue Microsoft is superior, I'm arguing Apple is a multi-national corporation that doesn't give a damn about you or your family, and am pointing your how ridiculous your love affair with them is.

third, PCs are cheaper. Sorry, but base line Mac is 1000, base line pc is 300. PC is cheaper. "But the Mac is more powerful and comparable to other 1000 dollar PCs". Yeah, but that's moot, fact is, if you don't need that power, and you only need the power of the 300 dollar PC, the PC is cheaper. Then of course they'll point out that the G5 was superior and blah blah blah, and I'll point out that than if the G5 was superior, why did they switch to Intel when there was an enormous cost to port their software to an intel based platform? X86 is better, apple admits, you should too.

forth, "Windows is more expensive because you drop that money every couple years on upgrades to PCs". Though yes it's true that PC users upgrade more often, your assumption that a PC "upgrade" consists of a new PC shows just how much you are blinded by the world of Apple. I upgrade my PC about once every 18 months. You know, a hard drive, more RAM, new video card, upgrades. Through none of that do I buy a new copy of the OS. System overhauls, or as a Mac user calls them "upgrades" I do about once every 5 or 6 years. The concept of keeping a system up to date is so foreign to the diehard Mac user there's no point of explaining it, so I'm not going to bother, I'll just leave it that a typical PC upgrade does not put more money in microsofts pocket.

fifth, OSX is more stable. Yeah, and guess what, the OS that runs my microwave is more stable than OSX. Anybody familiar with operating systems will get that joke and see that the analogy is completely valid. Mac OSX isn't a plug and play operating system, (actually it is, but they stripped that functionality out, and limit it to only run on “apple supported hardware”, but even this is moot, as I go into their screwing of BSD, which is more stable and supports more hardware), and when you don't need to support many hardware platforms, it's easier to make something stable. A comparison of Mac OSX to Windows, or really any other OS is unfair, as all other OS' are released under the assumption that they'll run under a lot of configurations. If you want to rip Windows apart, compare it to Linux, because at least that's a fair comparison.

sixth, this one hasn't been pointed out, but for the love of god, OSX isn't even really an OS. It's more a suite of programs and a GUI that runs on top of an OS. It's most similar to Windows 3.1, not Windows Vista. A better likeness would be KDE or Gnome though really. OSX is built on BSD, it's a GUI, not an OS. So before applauding Apple for making a more stable OS than windows, I think Apple needs to be scorned because OSX is the least stable distribution of BSD out there. Nobody is sure how Apple did it, but they screwed up the stability of BSD. Congrats Apple, we don't know how you did it, but you did.

I'm sick of writing, I'll leave it where it is now unless the Mac fans continue to spread FUD.
November 3, 2007 4:51:05 PM

V8VENOM said:
A few flaws:

1. Leopard $129 is a Full version -- go install it anywhere you like
2. Leopard does NOT have "Activation"
3. PC users upgrade every 2 years so you actually spend 3X more on hardware in addition to software upgrades as you'll need a separate copy per PC thanks to Windows activation
4. What is unfair? Mac can run OS X and Vista and XP and if you wanna hack a PC it can run OS X (hence the title of this thread)
5. Wanna be entertainers - musicians, mixers, colorist, film makers, photographers rarely start life with good money -- these are the folks buying Macs -- again Windows/Vista wins the snob war there
6. Going from OS X 10.4 to 10.5 does NOT require graphics card upgrades, doesn't require more RAM, and does NOT have any exclusive DX10 graphics API

You're the one NOT comparing the real costs of running Windows/Vista.


I have been visiting Tom's Hardware since before the "great bias began", but this is the first time I have felt compelled to post. For "the record", I just last night upgraded my iMac to Leopard and have two other computers in my home running Vista. So I am not a Mac or Windows "fanboi", as I use both. So without further ado...

1. I agree that the retail SKU of Leopard is a "full" version, as no previous OS is required to insall it. However, you can't install it anywhere you like, as 1 you have to have a Mac and 2 it must be at least a 867 MHz G3 with firewire.

2. So what? Activation is not the pit of all evil, as all it does is force the user to abide by the software license. Macs just dont' force you to do it. Activation is completely transparent unless you do frequent major hardware upgrades (usually, there have been a few glitches recently), or try to intstall it on multiple computers. If you buy a pre-built OEM PC, activation is normally a non-issue, as it is tied to the motherboard BIOS. You can replace anything except the motherboard and Windows won't care. Don't fear the unknown...

3. Back this statement up. I typically upgrade my PCs at least once a year, but this does not include a new OS. I purchased Windows XP Professional (retail SKU) in 2001, and am still using it (on my Mac of all things). Prior to getting Windows Vista, I used that same copy (legally) on 5 "different" computers. So, the upgrade frequency is moot when talking about an OS.

5. Proof is in the pudding. This was true in the 1980's and even for a good part of the 1990's, but there are very few entertainment - music, mixing, coloring, film making, and photography editing software that isn't avaialble on the PC. Macs are a niche market, growing, but still a small peice of the home computer pie.

6. Of course Leoprd doesn't "require" any upgrades from Tiger (ignoring for the sake of argument that you simply can't make video card upgrades in most Mac computers anyway). As Apple limited the installed base to computers they know could run it. Microsoft did not limit Vista (or XP for that matter) this way, they just list a few specifications and it is up to the user to meet those. The argument could be made, that you can install Vista on computers that won't allow for the best experience, at least Apple prevents this with their requirements. I know I would be very pissed if I went out and bought a new OS, just to have my computer run like a slug.

Bias is bad for everyone, and if you are going to take a side, come with facts not just opinons and conjectures based on rumor and misinformation.

:D 
November 3, 2007 7:48:28 PM

LinkRS you said almost exactly what i was going to say... well done.
November 3, 2007 9:33:28 PM

RaxerX29 said:
Nope.

But seriously, I have no problem with Mac hardware or software. I just can't stand the snobby attitudes of the Mac users I've known. And it would seem that Apple, as a company, is pretty snobby as well.


Amen brother

I m just sick of the Apple Fanatics
[Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source - Share This
fa·nat·ic /fəˈnætɪk/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[fuh-nat-ik] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun 1. a person with an extreme and uncritical enthusiasm or zeal, as in religion or politics.]
whining and they do whine well at least our stuff works
true but stop comparing your OS to Vista or any other MS OS
as until Apple makes an OS thats compatible with most of any piece of hardware out there there is no comparsion

Apple, IMO, is an arrogant company just look at their stupid PC vs MAC guy commercials
I have 2 good friends that use Apples, and I can do everything they can do on their beloved MAC's and dont be fooled either as I can do EXACTLY whatever they do, and just as fast or as good as they do it.

IF MS wrote Vista to be as hardware incompatible as Apple little kitty OSes Apple would be crying foul, and 95% of the world and thats alot of OSes out there, would be left holding their mouses

Apple has a notorious reputation for screwing their customers over hmm lets look at those G3s out there oh and those that bought the G5s with motorola CPUs

Apple communistic or totalitarian corporate ideals are just crap, IMO

I prefer to have a choice of a computer hence why I build my own, I dont lock myself or have faith any one company as they all suck, I just take the parts I need and slap them all together and install Windows

I use windows because the rest of the world uses it, my customers need me to know it inside and out

lets consider what would happen if the world was according to Apple assuming there was no MS around.

We would all be screwed, Apples OS to accomodate 100 of thousands of vendor would just be a bigger resource hog that it already is, dont believe than why has Tom's already proven that XP is more effiecent than OSX

Apple wants more customers and IMO the more market share they get the more issues problems and pains they will get exponentially with market share

If Apple moves from 5% to 10% market share their issuses I bet (IMO), if it may please the court, will exponentially increase. not jsut double but astronomically raise

Already we've seen that the hackers already have a new target for their Mal-wares Apple and even Linux
even though Apple barely would admit a problem of mal-ware only after their customers asked them about and the media starting saying "OMFG, theres a bug in OSX ... oh wait thats not a bug its a virus"

So come on Apple release OSX to the general public, oh wait they dont and cant, as they the anti-christ of PC world would fall flat on their face, cuz few companies would give 2 lil farts to design drivers for their OS, and I dont think Apple wants to be a competitive OS in the World

thank god for Linux

The absolute OS, its free, yup free, and yes u get hassles but since u pay $0.00 for it you dont care you put up with them albeit with some minor b*tchin'

So Apple sit down and shut up! You are not competive with MS in any form, oh yes you can show us how lovely your over priced (and it is way over priced) pieces of artwork (the only way I could ever justify buying their crap) are but it the reality of the big picture you dont have any grounds to on which to speak from

it would be like comparing a 2008 Ferrari to a 2008 Chevy Malibu except the Ferrari is a 308 GT from the 80s in terms of a performance comparison yes the Ferrari is beautiful to look at but it aint crap to be built in the numbers of which the PC market lives in

considering the numbers of computers working in the world lets just say a million to keep the math easy
well if there is 1,000,000 Computers and MS has a 90% market share
thats 900,000 Computer and if apple has a 5% share
they would have 50,000 Computers of course they control all the hardware thats installed so yeah it should be very easy to get it too work, oh but wait they still have issues
Considering that with these numbers MS can make a OS that works across an open field of hardware vendors is DAMN impressive
Personally if I was an OS systems programmer I would much rather work for Apple as it should be God awfully easy compared to a poor MS programmer that has to worry about legacy componants and makign the OS work with all those hardware vendor products out there

So Steve Jobs just shut the F up! Market your "Artwork" to the rich and stop comparign your "artwork" to a PC cuz they aint the same damn thing

another pondering thought, since the development of the cracked OSX to work on a PC, I cant wait for Apple to start crying bloody murder when those chinese software pirates start selling their Warez.

As I know I will laughing my arse off!

as V8Venom wrote:
A few flaws:

1. Leopard $129 is a Full version -- go install it anywhere you like
2. Leopard does NOT have "Activation"
3. PC users upgrade every 2 years so you actually spend 3X more on hardware in addition to software upgrades as you'll need a separate copy per PC thanks to Windows activation
4. What is unfair? Mac can run OS X and Vista and XP and if you wanna hack a PC it can run OS X (hence the title of this thread)
5. Wanna be entertainers - musicians, mixers, colorist, film makers, photographers rarely start life with good money -- these are the folks buying Macs -- again Windows/Vista wins the snob war there
6. Going from OS X 10.4 to 10.5 does NOT require graphics card upgrades, doesn't require more RAM, and does NOT have any exclusive DX10 graphics API

You're the one NOT comparing the real costs of running Windows/Vista.

1. Apple is almost coming out with a new OSX flavor every year ok maybe 2 since i dont really care, and nailing the older Macs with upgrades or jsut flat killing support for thei older comps
2. Apple does not need activation yet, as they control the hardware, as the OSX looks for special chips otherwise it wont install
3. PC user do not upgrade their systems every 2 years the industry average is like 5, performance minded peeps do, oh wait we can install cheaper upgrades when ever we feel like it, and dont have to go shop at apple.com to find out the same BS item is 2x as much as the same PC version
4. well mac user use bootcamp to run windows oh because windows doesnt look for special chips to be installed on, and no one said it wasnt unfair, most pc users could give a crap about runnign OSX on thier comps, where as Mac users have a legit reason to run windows xp on their macs, it runs better than OSX, huh wait not possible go look at Tom's and prepare to be humiliated
5. this is a myth, and while alot of "entertainers" do I see more that dont
6. going from XP to Vista while it may require a graphics card upgrade to use the Aero features, it DOESNT require it, and yes I would recommend anyone geting Vista to have 2GBs of ram, and yes Vista is bloated, but hey its been 6 years since XP wa released and hey MS has just a bit of WORK to do to ensure they dont intentionally just shaft peeps like Apple does with their customers as MS makes every effort to incorporate legacy devices til long after they are not need, where as Apple has a lovely history of just bending over old owners and giving them the shaft



November 3, 2007 11:40:08 PM

V8VENOM said:
Yeah another one, once again post by people that don't own a Mac -- brilliant. I just love it when people post about hardware they've never own or used daily.

seeker, you want to see the Vista bug list??

The primary difference between Apple and Microsoft is the sheer quantity of bugs -- a record Microsoft have always owned.



well I never said M$FT was without problems or bugs, but using a PC it's almost required that you know how to build your own these days and from the looks of the other camp things don't look pretty for people who nothing about the inner workings of a computer. You will never have a machine without bugs... there is always something becuase it's a machine. Even apple is without bugs... what do you think leopard was for. So saying M$FT has bugs and apple doesn't is just plain nonsense. There isn't any software I know of that doesn't have some sort of bug somewhere. If there was software such as this you would never need to buy and upgrade... right?

The point I was trying to make with the news article is that apple has always been about ease of use and they charge you for it, but what happens when apple becomes a widget factory and the software is neglected or rushed out the door and not properly beta tested. You can't tell me seriously that a computer maker such as apple who caters to peeps of which the majority wouldn't know a hard drive from a stick of memory to save their life should expect these people to read a manual now would you?...when they've always been told... "it just works".

These are the kind of people who can't program a vcr, and are lucky to set the clock on the microwave. So when you cater to such a crowd, if you don't cover all the bases you will have problems.

Additionally it was Apple who attacked M$FT with a blatant ad campaign to paint M$FT as a machine that always BSOD's, and has all kinds of problems. Additionally when a software company holds 90+% of a OS market there will be trouble. It's common sense that virus writers main goal is to cause major disruption so why waste your time on something that holds maybe 7% on a good day.

While I am a gamer at times I do alot of different things on the PC. Mac fans always like to point out that photo publishers, videographers etc use Mac's. I hate to burst your bubble but there are many more choices on the PC side.

Adobe even backed away from making premiere on the Mac side, probably due to FCP. Photoshop may be next if it hasn't happened already. You have many choices on the pc side for video editing... let's name a few.

1. Adobe premiere.
2. canopus edius
3. pinacle liquid motion
4. sony vegas
5. Ulead media video pro

++ several lower end products.

It's nice to be able to play a game if you want to, but the PC is way more than just games.

No the primary difference between M$FT and Apple is M$FT doesn't claim to be bug free and apple does even though it's not. :lol: 
November 4, 2007 1:43:00 AM

NightbladeXX said:
Amen brother

I m just sick of the Apple Fanatics
[Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source - Share This
fa·nat·ic /fəˈnætɪk/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[fuh-nat-ik] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun 1. a person with an extreme and uncritical enthusiasm or zeal, as in religion or politics.]
whining and they do whine well at least our stuff works
true but stop comparing your OS to Vista or any other MS OS
as until Apple makes an OS thats compatible with most of any piece of hardware out there there is no comparsion

Apple, IMO, is an arrogant company just look at their stupid PC vs MAC guy commercials
I have 2 good friends that use Apples, and I can do everything they can do on their beloved MAC's and dont be fooled either as I can do EXACTLY whatever they do, and just as fast or as good as they do it.

IF MS wrote Vista to be as hardware incompatible as Apple little kitty OSes Apple would be crying foul, and 95% of the world and thats alot of OSes out there, would be left holding their mouses

Apple has a notorious reputation for screwing their customers over hmm lets look at those G3s out there oh and those that bought the G5s with motorola CPUs

Apple communistic or totalitarian corporate ideals are just crap, IMO

I prefer to have a choice of a computer hence why I build my own, I dont lock myself or have faith any one company as they all suck, I just take the parts I need and slap them all together and install Windows

I use windows because the rest of the world uses it, my customers need me to know it inside and out

lets consider what would happen if the world was according to Apple assuming there was no MS around.

We would all be screwed, Apples OS to accomodate 100 of thousands of vendor would just be a bigger resource hog that it already is, dont believe than why has Tom's already proven that XP is more effiecent than OSX

Apple wants more customers and IMO the more market share they get the more issues problems and pains they will get exponentially with market share

If Apple moves from 5% to 10% market share their issuses I bet (IMO), if it may please the court, will exponentially increase. not jsut double but astronomically raise

Already we've seen that the hackers already have a new target for their Mal-wares Apple and even Linux
even though Apple barely would admit a problem of mal-ware only after their customers asked them about and the media starting saying "OMFG, theres a bug in OSX ... oh wait thats not a bug its a virus"

So come on Apple release OSX to the general public, oh wait they dont and cant, as they the anti-christ of PC world would fall flat on their face, cuz few companies would give 2 lil farts to design drivers for their OS, and I dont think Apple wants to be a competitive OS in the World

thank god for Linux

The absolute OS, its free, yup free, and yes u get hassles but since u pay $0.00 for it you dont care you put up with them albeit with some minor b*tchin'

So Apple sit down and shut up! You are not competive with MS in any form, oh yes you can show us how lovely your over priced (and it is way over priced) pieces of artwork (the only way I could ever justify buying their crap) are but it the reality of the big picture you dont have any grounds to on which to speak from

it would be like comparing a 2008 Ferrari to a 2008 Chevy Malibu except the Ferrari is a 308 GT from the 80s in terms of a performance comparison yes the Ferrari is beautiful to look at but it aint crap to be built in the numbers of which the PC market lives in

considering the numbers of computers working in the world lets just say a million to keep the math easy
well if there is 1,000,000 Computers and MS has a 90% market share
thats 900,000 Computer and if apple has a 5% share
they would have 50,000 Computers of course they control all the hardware thats installed so yeah it should be very easy to get it too work, oh but wait they still have issues
Considering that with these numbers MS can make a OS that works across an open field of hardware vendors is DAMN impressive
Personally if I was an OS systems programmer I would much rather work for Apple as it should be God awfully easy compared to a poor MS programmer that has to worry about legacy componants and makign the OS work with all those hardware vendor products out there

So Steve Jobs just shut the F up! Market your "Artwork" to the rich and stop comparign your "artwork" to a PC cuz they aint the same damn thing

another pondering thought, since the development of the cracked OSX to work on a PC, I cant wait for Apple to start crying bloody murder when those chinese software pirates start selling their Warez.

As I know I will laughing my arse off!

as V8Venom wrote:
A few flaws:

1. Leopard $129 is a Full version -- go install it anywhere you like
2. Leopard does NOT have "Activation"
3. PC users upgrade every 2 years so you actually spend 3X more on hardware in addition to software upgrades as you'll need a separate copy per PC thanks to Windows activation
4. What is unfair? Mac can run OS X and Vista and XP and if you wanna hack a PC it can run OS X (hence the title of this thread)
5. Wanna be entertainers - musicians, mixers, colorist, film makers, photographers rarely start life with good money -- these are the folks buying Macs -- again Windows/Vista wins the snob war there
6. Going from OS X 10.4 to 10.5 does NOT require graphics card upgrades, doesn't require more RAM, and does NOT have any exclusive DX10 graphics API

You're the one NOT comparing the real costs of running Windows/Vista.

1. Apple is almost coming out with a new OSX flavor every year ok maybe 2 since i dont really care, and nailing the older Macs with upgrades or jsut flat killing support for thei older comps
2. Apple does not need activation yet, as they control the hardware, as the OSX looks for special chips otherwise it wont install
3. PC user do not upgrade their systems every 2 years the industry average is like 5, performance minded peeps do, oh wait we can install cheaper upgrades when ever we feel like it, and dont have to go shop at apple.com to find out the same BS item is 2x as much as the same PC version
4. well mac user use bootcamp to run windows oh because windows doesnt look for special chips to be installed on, and no one said it wasnt unfair, most pc users could give a crap about runnign OSX on thier comps, where as Mac users have a legit reason to run windows xp on their macs, it runs better than OSX, huh wait not possible go look at Tom's and prepare to be humiliated
5. this is a myth, and while alot of "entertainers" do I see more that dont
6. going from XP to Vista while it may require a graphics card upgrade to use the Aero features, it DOESNT require it, and yes I would recommend anyone geting Vista to have 2GBs of ram, and yes Vista is bloated, but hey its been 6 years since XP wa released and hey MS has just a bit of WORK to do to ensure they dont intentionally just shaft peeps like Apple does with their customers as MS makes every effort to incorporate legacy devices til long after they are not need, where as Apple has a lovely history of just bending over old owners and giving them the shaft



Bla bla bla, some trues, bla bla bla, a lot of crap talk. You don't have a mac, so why all this crying? You seem such a smart guy. Run for President!
November 4, 2007 1:43:49 AM

pmr said:
Bla bla bla, some trues, bla bla bla, a lot of crap talk. You don't have a mac, so why all this crying? You seem such a smart guy. Run for President!


lol in fact i have POS g3 and another pos called a mac book, as i ve had several mac customers too

me run for prez never too much bs from untellectuals like u
November 4, 2007 2:25:40 AM

M$ owns a share in Apple doesn't it, quite ironic really.
November 4, 2007 2:52:40 AM

DualBoot said:
Both of the links to Apple from this article worked fine this morning. Now, you're required to sign up as a member of the Apple discussion group to view those links.


So they responded to an article on censorship with more censorship. 1984²

kingssman said:
As far as PC fanboys out there, Your system is going to be outdated by next month anyways. constantly buying the latest $400 graphics card or the next $800 cpu...


This coming from a guy that can only install a new graphics card or CPU with a soldering gun.
November 4, 2007 3:30:40 AM

All of mac OS is full version. I myself installed tiger on a store bought 250 gig hardrive (upgraded from the original 120) now, unless bestbuy is secretly selling hardrives with an older version of macOS on it that PC users don't know about, It's safe to say that the copy of OSX is indeed a full version and not an upgrade copy. If it were an upgrade copy it would clearly say on the box "Mac OSX Leopard Upgrade:".

Product activation: none so far, even if one was implemented it wouldn't be a hassle every time you want to reinstall the OS on the same machine.

Leopard minimum system requirements, 867mhz cpu. Where do I find a 867mhz cpu these days? Ebay? pawn shop? I have a hard time finding anything less than a PIV 1.6ghz socket 478 chip. Let alone a PIII mhz chip, let alone a mac with that low of specs. Besides would anyone try and run Vista on an 867mhz cpu? NO, you would run XP or even go back further and consider windows 2000 if all u want is a stable internet machine or a box with a hardrive in it.

And this deal about OSX not even an OS but a compilation of 3rd party apps? So linux isn't an OS when considering anything useful is mostly 3rd party? How bout windows?

then price. gratz on a $300 pc. considering a vista home basic full (non upgrade since hardrives don't come with preinstalled os's) is $199 that leaves you with basically a $101 in hardware. Of course microsoft offers vendors much cheaper pricing on their OS heck they sell windows to africa for $50, even if u do build your own pc in the united states for cheap, unless you go linux, the largest cost is a legal copy of windows OS.

but the thread is digressing. What's the deal of calling out apple as to "ripping off its customers" when microsoft has been playing games with it's customer base for the past 12 years? The neat thing about 3 years from now, Mac apps will still run on tiger as long as it's intel chips. Most likely nothing will run on XP machines anymore because of Direct X10 or other proprietary means. Sure 10.5 is an upgrade if anything, but so was windows ME, win2000 SP1-4, XP SP1-2, XP media center, XP Tablet, XP 64bit, and now Vista. Each one of them building on concepts of the previous and of course more eye candy.

Then the "waa I bought my mac 2 months before leopard came out", well too bad too sad. Though microsoft was nice enough to allow hardware manufactures to hand out coupons for free or cheap vista upgrades "provided proof of purchase, only on systems marked 'Vista Capable' ". if microsoft didn't do that they could be in a world of hurt because literally the world would be trying to draw up a lawsuit against microsoft. Besides, this just proves that their product is not at a fixed rate and it varies from market to market, if they feel like giving away freebies to old buyers and make new buyers pay full price.
November 4, 2007 5:37:42 AM

LinkRS,

Ye old first time poster compelled to speak -- it really would be better if you didn't because what you have pointed out is well...nothing?

1. Are you serious, a G3 with firewire -- that's your point of contention? ha ha-- errr, OK. Again, is what I listed not correct or bias?

2. So you agree?? Or are you saying Leopard requires activation? Again, what is not correct or bias?

3. I don't need to back it up, you just did it for me by saying "I upgrade every year" -- again, how is this bias?

5. Macs are not a niche market (30 million users) for professional photographers, audio creators/mixers, and video professionals -- but you need to read up some on Vista's problems with Audio -- specifically latency problems where it ca NOT get any events less that 50ms granularity -- hence why it is NOT going to be a good choice for audio professionals.

6. What are you debating here?? I can't follow your logic at all and it seems to go off onto something other than what I said?

BIAS is bad, and you've demonstrated that well. I came with facts, which apparenty you agreed with, but went off onto some other points of contention that I didn't mention? And what happened to item #4, you skipped that - being selective?

Seeker, stop mis-quoting "So saying M$FT has bugs and apple doesn't is just plain nonsense." - I didn't say that, just read what I really wrote and stop making stuff up to fullfil some bizarre purpose you have.

Nightbladexx, just stop writing, you don't have a Mac and you obviously have not installed bootcamp -- because there are so many things you wrote that make that very obvious -- say for example that WinXP (x86) under bootcamp will only see 2GB (it should see about 3.5GB since I have 8GB ram in my MacPro) so no it doesn't run better, it runs as good as it can in 2GB address space. Vista x64 under bootcamp will see all 8GB. Believing anything Tom's hardware has to say about a Mac is at best foolish. Tom's has consistantly provided WRONG information about Macs and Apple and I recall them calling the iPhone a flop -- and now that the real sales numbers have been release not a mention from Tom's (running away and hide).

Apple have been a consistant Wall street favorite stock to BUY not sell, even at $177/share.

I don't know why Tom's Hardware is publishing junk articles like this, it only promotes fanboys -- the ones that post X is better than Y without owning both and most not even understanding what they do own. Is this what Tom's wants to promote? Keep the fanboys going cause it generate web site hits so the advertisers are happy -- is that what these purile articles are really about. Just a way to feed the advertisers and Tom's belly?
November 4, 2007 6:20:49 AM

kingssman said:
Where do I find a 867mhz cpu these days?

I'm typing this on a 969MHz CPU, Oced from 800 :D 
November 4, 2007 10:57:13 AM

V8VENOM said:
LinkRS,

5. Macs are not a niche market (30 million users) for professional photographers, audio creators/mixers, and video professionals -- but you need to read up some on Vista's problems with Audio -- specifically latency problems where it ca NOT get any events less that 50ms granularity -- hence why it is NOT going to be a good choice for audio professionals.

Seeker, stop mis-quoting "So saying M$FT has bugs and apple doesn't is just plain nonsense." - I didn't say that, just read what I really wrote and stop making stuff up to fullfil some bizarre purpose you have.



You implied that Mac has less bugs than M$FT, but Apple has had an ad campaign that paints Mac in a whole different light = no bugs... IE. somehow it just magically works. [this was what I was talking about, I didn't actually say you said it.] Not to mention censorship if you compain about it anywhere they have a controlling interest. Rememer the ad campaign that had Jobs proclaiming "fastest computer in the world." This occurred right before he dumped IBM / Motorola to switch to intel.

Most Mac / Apple fanatics view M$FT as being monopolistic. How much more so is Apple/Mac?

Additionally, saying apple is not a niche product? 30million users? How many people do you think there are in this world? All PC problems have work arounds, throw a little more money at it... IE change the mobo, soundcard or combination of the two. You can't just sit there and say I have one problem so it's junk. Everyone has problems you can't run from them they will catch you sooner or later.

Windows is far from perfect, but at least you have many choices to get the job done when it comes to software that is available for the platform.

As far as leopard being an upgrade or whole OS... it's only an upgrade if you own a previous copy of OS X or whatever. [you paid for it previously] M$FT does the same thing similarly except they give free SP's... If you buy an upgrade disk it contains the whole OS. The only thing different is upon installation it will prompt you to put your disk in that you are upgrading from.

Apple stock has been a good performer for some time now. With the recent flop of the delivery with Leopard may concern investors that Apple is spreading it's resources too thin. If product launches become flakey and people stop buying could have a devastating effect.

It's common knowledge or at least it should be that Leopard was delayed not only due to bugs but because Apple had some problems that needed fixing with iphone and had to shift engineering resources to the iphone. Now with the not so stellar launch of Leopard, everyone and their mother will be watching what happens next.

As far as complaining about news articles... apple brought this on themselves with their ad campaign of attacking M$FT. It probably wouldn't be such a big deal if it wasn't for that. It appears from M$FT recent ad campaign with vista they couldn't care less what poor little apple does.

Go play some itunes on your iphone while watching some ivideo on your imac and cheer up!

And somebody calls M$FT a monopoly? :heink: 
!