Macgasm - Latest Comments in http://www.macgasm.net/2008/11/22/snow-leopard-why-so-soon/

Re: http://www.macgasm.net/2008/11/22/snow-leopard-why-so-soon/

Joshua Schnell — Sun, 23 Nov 2008 13:11:47 -0000

Yeah, that's probably my relatively new to the mac opinion coming through there. The first os I used was Tiger, so the time between Tiger to Leopard is probably adding to my bias a little. I never got to experience the Puma -> Jaguar -> Panther -> Tiger progression.

The Panther through Leopard releases all seem to have some pretty huge additions to functionality, but it seems like Snow Leopard is going to fall short of those releases. It's more of a cheetah to puma release.

Re: http://www.macgasm.net/2008/11/22/snow-leopard-why-so-soon/

Laydros — Sun, 23 Nov 2008 12:26:43 -0000

But most of the releases up to leopard were around 1.5 years apart I agree that performance and stability upgrades should be free, but in terms of schedule this is more of a return to the norm than a change.

Re: http://www.macgasm.net/2008/11/22/snow-leopard-why-so-soon/

Scott — Sun, 23 Nov 2008 07:58:14 -0000

I think Mac users have accepted the fact that OS X product releases are value for money purchases. We are not talking about £3-400 release as is the case with Microsoft new versions and I am personally happy to pay £99 every year or so for the sort of updates that Apple produce. I have upgraded ( over a number of machines ) from Panther to Tiger and Leopard and each upgrade I have felt was a major step forward over the previous and fully worth the purchase price.

The Apple model of annual upgrades for £100 rather than 4-5 year upgrades for £3-400 has been discussed many times and personally I am comfortable with this.

From what I have understood so far of the Snow Leopard update there are potentially MAJOR architectural improvements that promise to deliver further REAL benefits to users. Compare this the the changes in Windows with each update which inevitably require a machine of higher spec to produce the same ( or in Vista case lesser ) performance than before the upgrade.

Of course consumers can always vote with their dollars ( or pounds in the UK ! ) by not upgrading but I think history has shown that Mac devotees are quite happy to pay for the sort of improvements that Steve and his teams deliver with each of their OS upgrades.

Re: http://www.macgasm.net/2008/11/22/snow-leopard-why-so-soon/

GlutenBoy — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 17:05:48 -0000

Exactly. I hope they won't change for this or they put something in the Snow (haha) that we couldn't resist, ala "one more thing".

I would add that in the future we will see less and less big major release like Tiger and Win95 was. I think software company now realize that the Agile way of releasing smaller but more often is a better way of creating more stable, efficient (cost wise and productivity wise) software. The problem is how and when do we charge for this?

Re: http://www.macgasm.net/2008/11/22/snow-leopard-why-so-soon/

Joshua Schnell — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 16:57:27 -0000

Some excellent points man, but I kind of see coverflow and quicklook more as features then necessities. You're right, I'd have a hard time living with out them, but it freaks me out that it's starting to seem like we are paying for one set of feature updates, and one set of under the hood updates. Man, I hope I'm wrong!

Re: http://www.macgasm.net/2008/11/22/snow-leopard-why-so-soon/

Joshua Schnell — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 16:54:30 -0000

To steal an idea from microsoft, wouldn't that then make this more of a service pack than an actual os update? Should consumers be expected to pay for an upgrade that primarily benefits the developers? I have a really hard time trying to figure out how consumers should be expected to foot this bill.

Re: http://www.macgasm.net/2008/11/22/snow-leopard-why-so-soon/

GlutenBoy — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 16:01:59 -0000

I think Snow Leopard contains major architecture changes and have the possibility to affect many applications or new release of applications. In that case developers need to put their hands on a beta release to add and test the new architecture changes in their applications and this is not possible with a simple software update.

Now I will agree with you, as a consumer I don't want to pay for this either, except if there is major benefit in the short term and I don't think it is the case here.