Another small Apple rant

[vandorssen]

I've been using Apple computers since kindergarten, and Macs since 2nd grade. I've always felt the Macintosh to be a cut above Windows machines, like a lone BMW in a lot full of Kia's. And generally this has held true, but lately one of Apple's policies has been gaining my ire. For those not "in the know", Apple has, almost like clockwork, been churning out a new version of it's Mac OS X (10) operating system every 12-18 months since it was introduced. Each version (10.0 - 10.3 (the current version)) has included some incremental program updates, new features, new security patches, and so on. Each iteration so far has also included more and upgraded versions of the so-called i-Apps (iTunes, Mail, Safari, iCal, iMovie, etc.), but the underlying code has remained virtually the same. This is not all bad, as Apple believes in getting its newest innovations out as quickly as possible, as well as keeping up enthusiasm for the platform by introducing new features today that other vendors (who shall remain nameless) promise to have ready in 4-5 years.

 

But all this has come at a cost. $258US to be exact. Twice now I have paid $129US for the privilege of beta-testing Apple's latest OS. Features that could easily be added to a previous generation OS are reserved only for the latest and greatest. Now Apple wants me to do it again! Mac OS X - Tiger (10.4) is just around the corner, again adding new features and capabilities that could be as easily added to OS X - Panther (10.3). Features and capabilities I not only want, but (if I want to stay current with the latest software otherwise) features and capabilities I need.

 

Again, for Windows users who are unfamiliar with the"new" (Unix-based) Mac platform, these $129US OS updates are akin to Windows Service Packs (alright, a little more than that). If the Nameless Company charged $129US for each service pack, we'd all still be making due with Windows 98 SE. But, for some reason, we Mac users are gluttons for punishment, and seem to accept our fate of paying $129US every 12-18 months to beta-test the latest Mac OS.

 

The one silver lining is that Apple seems to be catching to our groans of disgust and has promised to let everyone get caught up and catch our breath after the next "update" due out this fall.

 

To make it clear though, I do use and enjoy the Windows OS as well (or else I'd be playing Morrowind at 10FPS using Virtual PC). I think Windows 2000 is the greatest thing to happen to the x86 platform since BeOS 5.0 PE, and I hate Windows XP with an uncommon passion. And I like Windows 98 as well.

 

I just needed to get that off my chest, and this seemed to be as good a place as any.

[Slaiv]

That really sucks... :huh:

[Brighid]

I've always felt the Macintosh to be a cut above Windows machines, like a lone BMW in a lot full of Kia's. 

 

I agree that macs are better. I can't afford one though. <_<

 

Each iteration so far has also included more and upgraded versions of the so-called i-Apps (iTunes, Mail, Safari, iCal, iMovie, etc.), but the underlying code has remained virtually the same...Twice now I have paid $129US for the privilege of beta-testing Apple's latest OS.

 

Do you have to pay for the updates because Apple has to pay to use the Unix code?

 

To make it clear though, I do use and enjoy the Windows OS as well (or else I'd be playing Morrowind at 10FPS using Virtual PC).

 

Pardon a stupid question. I'm a bit computer illiterate, but, Does this work on Linux? :rolleyes:

 

I think Windows 2000 is the greatest thing to happen to the x86 platform since BeOS 5.0 PE, and I hate Windows XP with an uncommon passion.  And I like Windows 98 as well.

 

My new computer came with XP preloaded. I use Linux whenever possible cuz I hate XP, but My brother-in-law has ME on his laptop, and I've never seen anything I hate more than that! :ranting:

[vandorssen]

I agree that macs are better. I can't afford one though. 

The new eMac I just got was $924US with free shipping and a free printer. A comparably configure Dell (with the same features as the eMac) was just a bit less at $860US.

 

Do you have to pay for the updates because Apple has to pay to use the Unix code?

Yes and no... The underlying Unix code is not being changed a great deal (if at all) with each new version. It is mostly the Aqua and Cocoa code that is being changed with each upgrade; code that Apple already owns. OS X is what I would call "quasi-opensource"; that is most of the code is freely available (it is built on the open source Darwin Unix for Power PC) and a great deal of open source software is available for it (Apache, X11, XWindow, Cups, Gimp, OpenOffice.org, Blender, etc.). A lot of Linux software has been ported to OS X and you can always port it yourself by downloading the source code and recompiling it. But as far as licensing the Unix code is concerned (and I am probably wrong) that is a non starter.

 

Pardon a stupid question. I'm a bit computer illiterate, but, Does this work on Linux? 

I think Linux has Wine for a Windows emulator, and I would expect better performance out of a Windows emulator running on x86 hardware than I would on Power PC*. However, I don't know if Wine supports Direct X emulation which would be a prerequisite for playing 3D games. Virtual PC does not support Direct X emulation (besides Direct Draw) unless you hack it. Even then on my dual 2.0GHz G5 system Direct 3D games barely crawl along at a max of about 10FPS at 1024x768 resolution, 32-bit color, no AA and no filtering.

 

 

*It is a little known fact that Microsoft did make a version of Windows NT that ran on the Power PC platform. This was mostly used on non-unix versions of IBM's RS6000 system, but it could be modified to run on Macs as well. There also was a version of Windows 98 made that would have run natively on Power PC systems, including Macs, but the project was killed before it even left the alpha testing stage. A version of Windows 2000 exists (purportedly) that will run on NWR (New World ROM) Power Macs, but I have seen not but rumor of it.

[Dagger of Symachus]

Apple probably charges so much for the updates since they control such a small percentage of the computer market (I believe its about 5%) they need to keep a strong cashflow, though they most likely are going to stop seeing as they may begin to lose customers if they continue to charge so highly.