Mac OS X: Expected cost of OS X Snow Leopard full version

Average price

by mrmacfixit  - 6/11/09 6:51 AM

of 10.x upgrades has been $125.

I think your suggested route would be a good move.

That said, ALL of those moves through the cat names has been labeled as upgrades. Even the disk was marked as such.

$150 would seem a "little" high for the full, stand alone version of SL, with $130 being about right.

P

Your plan is sound but

I would wait until official pricing is announced at launch. Apple did say at WWDC that they wanted everyone to upgrade from Leopard, but I'd bet they want all users alike to move up as well. They may not have different pricing; only the the $29 and $49 upgrades have been mentioned. Considering that previous versions of OS X have allowed for skipping between major releases, there is a possibility for similar pricing. If you choose to wait for Snow Leopard before buying regular Leopard, there's a chance you could save extra money altogether. Just saying. Good luck.

-BMF

That's confusing,

by mrmacfixit  - 6/27/09 6:03 AM

Couple of points that you seem to have misinterpreted.

Snow Leopard will only run on Intel Macs and is not a new operating system. It removes the PPC code from the existing OS X (10.5) and has a bunch of stuff that need the Intel processor to work.
This is NOT a point release, it is a full version upgrade from 10.5 to 10.6

Next version will be OS X will not cause any confusion/legal problems with anyone as its name will be OS X (10.7.0) which does not come anywhere near your cited X11.
By the time they get to version 10.9.99, the next version of the OS will invariably have another name as the X in OS X stands for 10. Maybe OS XI ?

Your G4 machines are in need of replacing if you want to be able to run what is now the latest version of OS X (10.5.7) at a decent speed on them. On a G4 processor I would not consider running the latest version of the OS. You G5 will be able to cope with Leopard though.

Yes, System 9 did hang on for quite a while after the introduction of OS X. I'm sure you remember the bloated, convoluted size of that OS, which had reached the point of being unsupportable and not easy to update.

Updating an Operating System is an ongoing process and at some point you will have to require new hardware to run the new system. This is true of Windows, Linux and OS X.
The new version of Windows will undoubtedly require hardware upgrades for millions of people, Vista should have done but was hidden from the average user which may account for some of the sucky experiences of Vista users. It's just not possible to support every type of computer that still exists in the wild, ask Microsoft, and at some point you have to call "obsolescence" on some machines.

I agree, replacing all those machines at the same time is a heck of an expense. Don't go that route. Upgrade your G5 for a new iMac (costing way less than the original prices of the G5 and be much faster and efficient) and, as the others become to expensive to repair, replace them. You don't have to have the latest and greatest all at once.
10.5 will not be going away soon, will continue to be updated by Apple and will continue to give sterling service for quite a few years to come.

P

(NT) They made non-Intel Macbooks?

by mrmacfixit  - 6/12/09 10:25 AM

10.7???????:

What is 10.7? I read in the post earlier, I think it was from P / Mr. MacFixit mentioning the new OS as 10.7 and I thought 10.4 is Tiger, 10.5 is Leopard, and 10.6 is Snow Leopard.

I still have 10.4.11

Any OS upgrades I will just get laptops

and netbooks, which Apple has yet to release one. .....until then I will get HP netbooks with Linux on them.