wonderfield on 15/1/2012 at 05:00
Quote Posted by Volitions Advocate
oh.. Re: Pricing
I'm not holding my breath. But I found out that a digital upgrade from Snow Leopard to Lion is a whopping 40 bucks. I hope Microsoft takes this to heart, because I am sick of getting ripped off in that department.
Even cheaper than that: $30. To be fair, Apple does well on hardware sales, so OS X is somewhat 'subsidized'. Still, you don't get a comparatively good value with Windows unless you're able to take advantage of infrequent sales or can get in on an educational discount.
Such is the nature of monopolies, I suppose. Another major player in the OS market would be helpful.
Renzatic on 15/1/2012 at 07:02
Quote Posted by wonderfield
Even cheaper than that: $30. To be fair, Apple does well on hardware sales, so OS X is somewhat 'subsidized'. Still, you don't get a comparatively good value with Windows unless you're able to take advantage of infrequent sales or can get in on an educational discount.
Such is the nature of monopolies, I suppose. Another major player in the OS market would be helpful.
Not somewhat subsidized. It is. Apple is a hardware company. That's where they make their money. So they can afford to sell their OS upgrades for considerably less than MS does.
Vernon on 15/1/2012 at 14:30
Exactly. Plus you need an apple machine to run apple software so the comparison between OSX and Windows is utterly invalid.
wonderfield on 15/1/2012 at 17:56
Quote Posted by Renzatic
Not somewhat subsidized. It is. Apple is a hardware company. That's where they make their money. So they can afford to sell their OS upgrades for considerably less than MS does.
Apple is both a hardware and a software company. They produce and sell both hardware and software.
Quote Posted by Vernon
Exactly. Plus you need an apple machine to run apple software so the comparison between OSX and Windows is utterly invalid.
No.
Volitions Advocate on 16/1/2012 at 04:19
Wonderfield is right, since Apple made the switch from IBM to Intel, it's been childs play to make a Hackintosh. You just need the right motherboard.
When you work in a New Media department, especially one involving audio, you work around a LOT of apple stuff. And there is most definitely a good comparison here, especially with the switch to x86 / x64 hardware. While I agree that the price of apple hardware probably subsidizes the cost of some software, since it costs so damn much, it looks more like a smart business model than anything. A new way of marketing. It's true that it's difficult to get a copy of OSX if you don't own a mac, since the updates are mostly sold on the app store, which you'd never have access to on a Windows machine, but you can still buy the OS all by itself on a live install USB thumbdrive and its only 70 or 80 bucks directly from Apple, and it should boot up once you have your bios settings worked out.
I just really don't like the idea of paying 100 dollars or more on top of the price of a tablet just for a windows license. Mind you I'll be a student for another year yet and I could still take advantage of academic pricing.
Vernon on 16/1/2012 at 07:11
No he's wrong.
You're predicating a sweeping, general argument on a
miniscule niche of a large market. Who makes hackintoshes? The millions of people who have iPhones and Macs? I think not. I would say less than 0.005% of people who run Apple anything. Never mind the fact that it is illegal with regards to their EULA, and they can take civil legal action is they so choose. That shouldn't surprise anyone who has read an Apple software EULA.
Quote Posted by "Section 2A Mac OS X EULA"
A. Single Use License. Subject to the terms and conditions of this License, unless you have purchased a Family Pack or Upgrade license for the Apple Software, you are granted a limited non-exclusive license to install, use and run one (1) copy of the Apple Software on a single Apple-branded computer at a time. You agree not to install, use or run the Apple Software on any non-Apple-branded computer, or to enable others to do so. This License does not allow the Apple Software to exist on more than one computer at a time, and you may not make the Apple Software available over a network where it could be used by multiple computers at the same time.
It is also left as a murky legal grey area if you decide you want to give your old leopard disc to somebody when you upgrade to Lion. Nice.
Quote:
I just really don't like the idea of paying 100 dollars or more on top of the price of a tablet just for a windows license.
Well if you save up your pennies and try hard at school you can eventually grab yourself an ipad for a few hundred bucks more
Quote:
They produce and sell both hardware and software.
Thanks Cpt. Obvious. The world is just straight up black and white like that, isn't it?
Quote Posted by wonderfield
No.
Um yes. Your argument may seem clear in your head, but it is superficial. Perhaps you just haven't actually thought enough about it. More likely you're just confused and blinded by Apple's marketing department. Apple software is part of its walled-garden business model. It has been this way since the first Macintosh, up to today. Incompatibility of Apple software is done by design. Other than iTunes, there is very little Apple software that can legally (or otherwise) be run on non-Apple hardware.
Inline Image:
http://www.gsmdome.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/revenuebycategoryq210.jpgThe only time they ever change that stance is when it will maximise profit (like everyone else). Example: iTunes on Windows. Windows is designed to run on a broad range of hardware (Boot Camp for example!). That's the Microsoft model. OSX is the opposite. You need Apple hardware to run the OS.
Here's the main point:
Code:
Platform cost of hardware +OSX cost of OSX + hardware cost of Windoze
imac ~$1500 ~$1500 ~$100
macbook pro ~$2000 ~$2000 ~$100
non-apple x86/ARM/x64 N/A N/A ~$100
OSX <-> Windows is a bullshit comparison.
Hell why don't we all throw out some bullshit arguments? Let's just say that OSX can be cheap cheap since it is a wrapper for BSD (i.e. the hard work is all already done) with shitty walled-garden java, cocoa and a couple of other duct-tape APIs shoehorned to be compatible with a two-decades old programming language designed by the high priest of anticompetitive practice in the tech world. Oh wait that isn't bullshit.
Hell, I can make WMDs, nukes, Wikileaks apps and gay black midget fisting porn on Windows and I won't even break the EULA
Anyway, back on topic: Metro sucks dong.
Volitions Advocate on 16/1/2012 at 07:55
I don't understand where you're taking the argument. You haven't proved that OSX doesn't run on non-apple hardware. It does. Who cares if the EULA doesn't permit it, people do it. The amount of people that do it has no bearing on whether or not it can be done.
Apple doesn't seem to really care much about it anyway unless you're doing it for people as a business.
This is as far as I took the argument. Windows and OSX are the 2 main competitors for consumer PC Operating systems, discounting O.S.S. OSX is much less money to upgrade / purchase than Windows. So I wish that Microsoft would charge less. I wasn't talking about hardware or any of the things you just cited.
as for Metro, I'm just reserving final judgement until it's fully developed.
Vernon on 16/1/2012 at 08:23
My only point is that in the real world, Windows versus OSX really is a bullshit comparison due to the fact that 99.99% of people run what came with their machine. The fact that some slashdotter can figure out how to run OS X on non-apple hardware doesn't change that. Hell, you could run it on a giant babbage engine and a pegboard given enough time and resources.
Quote:
OSX is much less money to upgrade / purchase than Windows.
No it isn't less money, since you have to buy a hugely overpriced piece of hardware to run it. When I say "you" I'm not talking about
you. I'm talking about the millions of "non-technical folk" (?) who have flocked to the altar of apple and wouldn't have the slightest clue about the difference between windows and osx other than its shiny and you have the right to sniff your own farts because you paid more
Volitions Advocate on 16/1/2012 at 12:28
Quote Posted by Vernon
other than its shiny and you have the right to sniff your own farts because you paid more
Well I'll definitely have to agree with you on that point. I go to school with those people.
wonderfield on 16/1/2012 at 16:07
Quote Posted by Vernon
More likely you're just confused and blinded by Apple's marketing department.
I suspect that if I were "blinded" by Apple marketing, I wouldn't be buying competing Microsoft products. Or do you believe it is Apple's intention for me to buy competing Microsoft products as part of their consumer blinding process?
