OSNews

From: TheSeeker
there has been much discussion over recent years about the cost of going to OS X. For a classic mac os user, you had to pay to get the beta....apple did not provide it free.

The Mac OS X Public Beta (announced September 13th, 2000) cost US$29.95.

Now, while Mac OS X 10.0 was arguably beta quality, it was not released as a beta and cost US$129.00 for all users. That's an important distinction; I feel that 10.0 was beta quality as you do. But since it's not in my prerogative to make such decisions - because I don't work for Apple and Mac OS X is not my product - I'm not terribly upset about it.

So, had you bought both the Public Beta and then Mac OS X 10.0, your cumulative cost at this point is US$158.95.

if you bought 10.04 (still beta actually), 10.1 was only free if you happened to be fortunate enough to be first in line at a store that had the discs in stock. otherwise you paid.

Mac OS X 10.1 shipped on September 25th, 2001. The US$19.95 was a blanket shipping + handling charge for those that didn't get free copies from a dealer (and ordered it online or over the 'phone). The issuing of free copies to dealers was not executed correctly by Apple, resulting in some dealers giving out all their copies within minutes of opening on the 25th... and others not getting any or getting pathetically low amounts.

That the upgrade was free - or essentially free - was seen, and still is seen, as an admission by Apple that Mac OS X 10.0 was not up to scratch.

Cumulative cost now US$178.90 (assuming that you paid to get the CD).

you have paid each year to get updates.

Incorrect. Apple has already made it clear they have perverted the accepted versioning system to preserve the 10.x major version number for as long as possible, for marketing reasons. As such the each 10.x revision is a new major update to the OS.

This standard was incidentally first set by Microsoft with Windows 2000 (Windows NT 5.0) and Windows XP (Windows NT 5.1). Now, they had upgrade pricing (which Apple has not had for Mac OS X major releases to date), but also, Windows (non-upgrade edition) costs somewhat more.

This perversion means that all "service packs" and other updates are point releases (10.x.y), which are free to download and always have been to date with Mac OS X.

Whether you're an individual or a business, you only upgrade because you want to upgrade, or because applications you need drive you to upgrade. There are happy 10.2.8 users out there that will likely continue to be happy for years, because they have no need to upgrade.

Cumulative cost - assuming you have bought 10.2 and 10.3 - is now US$436.90.

you paid in many cases to upgrade old macs (pre g3) so that you could run os x.

This is despite reports of the large body of OS 9 users out there, that last I checked outnumbered OS X users.

"You paid in many cases to upgrade old PCs so that you could run Windows XP, and will do so again so you can run Windows Longhorn if the rumoured specifications are true."

It's easy to _say_ it, but...

you paid in many cases too for all new third party software because it either didnt run in classic mode or ran with too many issues.

I have heard a quoted figure that 85% of OS 9 software runs in Classic with either no issues or only minor issues. Of course, the old adage applies here as a disclaimer: "lies, damn lies, and statistics."

Upgrading to carbonised - or even rewritten - versions of software for Mac OS X was an extra cost of upgrading - and a very significant one in professional software - in stark contrast to other platforms to date. However, since Mac OS X is a completely different operating system from Mac OS 9, I'm not sure how this could have been avoided.

you paid for new third party hardware in many cases because legacy equipment did not work with x...especially the huge commitment many mac users had put into scsi over many many years. apple just said hey, lets move to firewire, so what if you have thousands invested in scsi scanners and hard drives etc etc.

Can't argue with this one. A lot of support, even for non-legacy devices, went away in OS X and still hasn't come back. SCSI was a particularly sore point in Mac OS X until the latter 10.2.x releases, and even then it's not exactly improved back to 'OS 9 standards'.

Apple lost a number of customers - publicly - over this move. Hopefully a move that they will not repeat. But I'm cautious to watch MacFixIt for a little bit after a major OS update from Apple to know what I'm getting into...

add all that up and you have the Switch Campaign alright: its called 5% of market was Apples when Jobs launched the iMac and now it is 1.8% six years later. The Switch Campaign is to move to Windows.

You can disagree with me, but I believe that Apple's marketshare % will remain in the doldrums for the next few years, but then - provided they continue with their good work on Mac OS X, and depending on the state of Longhorn - will be able to increase it. Because with a few more years of work, Apple will finally be in a position to offer all their products competitively.

Of course, whether they _will_ increase it or not is another matter, and Apple have snatched defeat from the jaws of victory more than once before...