[WTF Apple???] - Computers

Search Tech-Forums - link takes you to our Forum's search page.

Note: The following is only a text archive!

To view the actual forum discussion, please visit our website at http://www.tech-forums.net

Pages:1

WTF Apple???
(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)

Posted by: Warez Monster

Apple’s Pay For Patch Plan Backfires
Apple’s plan to charge customers $5 for a patch that allows existing Intel based Macs to work with the new Airport Extreme is understandably drawing a lot of criticism.

The 802.11n installer is being bundled with new Airport Extreme base stations that retail for $179, but consumers who purchased Intel-based Macs before Apple officially announced the new AirPort Extreme last week will have to purchase the patch.

[url]http://www.newsfactor.com/story.xhtml?story_id=100005SGNKEO[/url]

Posted by: The General

Yeah, Apple must be on drugs these past few days... No 3rd party software on the iPhone, no skins that look like the iPhone, not knowing if they are on good terms with Cisco or not, trying to make up laws to get $5 out of every C2D owner.

I think they'll be over it soon enough, until then, I'll just pirate the installer. ;)

Posted by: starkmann

My mother-in-law bought a Mac a few years back. Everytime I came byit needed something and it seemed like there was an upgrade to the OS every six months that cost money. Now she has a PC and I have and iBook that will have Ubuntu installed on it.
So they have been doing this crap for a bit now. Too bad too, ten years ago I was a big time Mac fan.

Posted by: mac_mogul

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by starkmann [/i]
[B]Everytime I came byit needed something and it seemed like there was an upgrade to the OS every six months that cost money.[/B][/QUOTE]

What on earth are you talking about?
Apple updates the Operating system MAYBE once a year. Every six months is riddiculous.
You don't HAVE to buy the update you know.

Man people around here are DUMB! I SWEAR TO GOD! ITS DAWN OF THE RETARDS!!!

:mad:

Posted by: moisiss

I have always thought that it was a little strange that Apple releases what seem to be fairly menial upgrades to OSX (though to be fair, I haven't used OSX on a regular basis for about a year now and am not completely familiar with everything that is included in the upgrades).... fairly frequently... and then want to charge people for it (again, I don't know how much they charge.... or if the price depends on whether or not you already have an earlier version of OSX). If it was a totally new OS (like OS11) then OK.... but to have to pay to go from like OS10.2.1 to OS 10.2.2..... come on.

People always talk about how the only thing Microsoft cares about is money (hence the M$ nickname).... but I have never had to pay for an upgrade to XP. Seems kinda ironic doesn't it?

Posted by: The General

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by moisiss [/i]
[B]but I have never had to pay for an upgrade to XP. Seems kinda ironic doesn't it? [/B][/QUOTE]

Are you kidding me? Yes you do; you have to pay for Vista.

Mac OS X is like "Windows" where 10.1, 10.2, 10.3, 10.4 and 10.5 are all major revisions, just as 95, 98, 2000, XP, and Vista are. You don't have to pay to upgrade Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger, just like you don't have to pay to upgrade Windows XP. You DO have to pay to get Vista, just like you have to pay to get Leopard.

The only difference between Mac OS X and Windows is that major revisions come more quickly, because Apple works faster. Windows has had no major revision since 2002, Apple has had 5 major revisions since 2001.

I don't see what the problem is.

Posted by: moisiss

That makes sense.

I guess where the confusion comes in (for me at least) is the naming. Like I said in the previous post, I am not really that familiar with the differences in the upgrades.... So when someone goes from like 10.2 to 10.3 the naming makes it sound like it is a fairly minor upgrade. When you go from XP to Vista, it's obvious that it is a completely new operating system (more so than if they named it XP and XP.2) because the name is completely different and is not routed in the previous version. But if the revisions between like 10.4 and 10.5 are just as dramatic as going from XP to Vista... well, cool..... I don't see a problem paying for it then(although I think from a marketing standpoint they should just call it OS11 so as to avoid any confusion).

Posted by: The General

No, it makes perfect sense.

Mac OS X has version numbering... Unlike "service pack 12" or "security update 49890" and crap like that.

Mac OS X 10.a.b

a = major revisions: Cheetah, Jaguar, Panther, Tiger, Leopard (1, 2, 3, 4, 5) ... you pay for these

b = minor revisions, you don't pay for these. These could be equated to service packs.

I'm using 10.4.8 right now, so when Leopard comes out I have to "buy" it or keep using Tiger (which continues to get updates until 10.6 as far as I know, just not the features and crap with Leopard.

Whatever, I'm over it. If you think it doesn't make sense, then you're living in a fantasy land full of viruses and service packs and security updates.

Posted by: moisiss

Huh? I didn't say that it didn't make sense....

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by moisiss [/i]
[B]That makes sense. [/B][/QUOTE]

The rest was just me commenting on why I was confused. Not trying to diss. :)

Posted by: starkmann

[QUOTE]
Man people around here are DUMB! I SWEAR TO GOD! ITS DAWN OF THE RETARDS!!!

:mad: [/B][/QUOTE]

just how I recall in Napoleon:p

Posted by: mac_mogul

Whatever. Apple can charge for their updates if they want to. My guess is this AirPort extreme update is INCLUDED with OS X Leopard and this is just a way for people who actually NEED 802.11n to get it. But even then it doesn't matter unless you have an 802.11n reciever/base station.......

So basically, apple isn't saying PAY UP OR DIE. They're saying, hey if you need it, we sell it.

SO GET OVER IT!