![OS X OS X](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/macosx_64.png)
![Operating Systems Operating Systems](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/os_64.png)
![Businesses Businesses](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/business_64.png)
![IT IT](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/it_64.png)
![Apple Apple](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/apple_64.png)
Why Apple Delayed Leopard for the iPhone 453
Ernest DeFarge writes "Apple recently announced that they've pulled several key programmers from the OS X 10.5 "Leopard" and assigned them to the iPhone in order to get it done on time. In doing so, they delayed Leopard for 4 months. Does that mean that the iPhone is more important to Apple than Mac OS? Or is it just capitalizing on the current state of Apple's fanbase?"
Unfair comparison (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Unfair comparison (Score:5, Insightful)
From a business perspective, Apple doesn't want their major announcements overlapping. So delaying the OS by a few months means that they can provide a steady stream of announcements.
Re:Unfair comparison (Score:5, Funny)
There doesn't seem to be much of a rush to upgrade to Vista either.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
XP is a good (enough) OS and there's no rush to upgrade
I believe MS failed its costumers by delaying Vista not because of the delay itself (it would be acceptable if they did ship all the new technology that was promised, not just the eye candy), but because the lateness seems due to incompetence and the inclusion of all sort of technology worthless to the end-user (read anti-consumer drm.)
Now let's look at Apple:
Re:Unfair comparison (Score:5, Insightful)
Pretty much. This isn't "Apple Vista" we're talking about here.
Quite right. Copland/Rhapsody was Apple's Vista.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The problem with Vista is that it was so hideously behind schedule that the all features that made it worth upgrading were torn out to get the thing actually shipped. MS needed to make the deadline, because XP's teetering dangerously close to its end-of-life. (Official EOL is next January, with mainstream support continuing until 2009), and Win2k
Captivated market (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple users are certainly no more locked in than users of any other platform. The average useful life of a general purpose personal computer has been two to four years, depending largely on individual use case. If you don't like being locked in to Windows, buy a Mac the next time you need a new system. Same works in reverse.
Re:Captivated market (Score:4, Insightful)
relevancy (Score:4, Interesting)
Who is being held captive? (Score:5, Insightful)
You can not install the update and deal with new apps not working with your Mac, or you can install Windows or Linux on your Mac, wasting the premium you paid for the box.
You're making the usual Apples v. Oranges mistake. Just as nobody would compare a $500 Windows machine with a $2,000 Windows machine, it is foolish to compare bargain basement PCs with Macs. If you want to compare quality hardware with quality hardware, compare $2,000 machines. You spend $2,000 each on three different laptops. Here are the three scenarios:
On your Mac, if you can not install the update and deal with new apps not working with your Mac, you CAN install Windows or you CAN install Linux on your Mac.
On your Windows machine, Microsoft comes out with an upgrade. You cannot install the update and deal with new apps not working with your Windows computer. You CAN install Linux on your machine. You CANNOT install Macintosh on your machine.
On your Linux machine, the latest and greatest Linux distro arrives. You cannot install the update and deal with new apps working sluggishly or not working at all on your computer because of processor speed, graphics card limitations, or limited disk space. You CAN install Windows on your machine. You CANNOT install Macintosh on your machine.
So the Macintosh hardware gives you three OS choices. The other two only give you two OS choices each. I fail to see how the Apple hardware locks you in more than PC hardware.
Re:Not locked in, locked OUT (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Not locked in, locked OUT (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Get over it. You want OS X, buy a Mac. Otherwise stick with Windows, *Nix, or write your own OS.
If Apple tried the business model of selling people like you copies of OS X, they would go out of business. Their hardware sales subsidize software development. No hardware revenue, no development expense. If they priced it to actually recover the "hardwareless" cost, you wouldn't be willing to pay and lots of your unwashed b
Re:Not locked in, locked OUT (Score:5, Insightful)
No, it's an example of you're not the customer. You haven't purchased a computer from them, so you're not a customer. Period. Whine and gripe about it all you want, but if you want Mac OS X, you must become Apple's customer, and that pretty much requires a hardware purchase.
Try thinking of it like this: Apple sells computers. Mac OS X is a pack-in (and really, it's optional, you can install Linux or Windows if you want). You don't get the "free" copy of Mac OS X and a fully supported installation without buying hardware. You could just buy the boxed version of Mac OS X (well, once 10.5 is out, anyway) and install it on your existing hardware, but it's unsupported. And don't bother with the tired "it's not allowed by the EULA" argument, since that hasn't ever stopped anyone before and it probably isn't even legally enforceable, much less enforceable in a practical sense.
So don't use Apple computers. It is, as you stated, your choice. But know that by not using them, you aren't a customer, and aren't entitled to be treated like one.
Re:Not locked in, locked OUT (Score:5, Insightful)
> for it because I use the computer for music production.
> I'd like Apple to sell me a version of OSX that I could run on this new machine, too, but they've decided that I can't use
> their OS unless I pay a premium for their hardware (which is basically either the same or inferior to what I've got).
You spent a lot of time and money creating a quiet and cool machine for music production, yet you are not willing to pay Apple any kind of premium to make you a quiet and cool machine for music production? Apple has specifically made "quiet" a feature since the 1980's. They put time and effort into that whereas others don't and then you have to.
In addition to making your machine quiet and cool, Apple will also include a complete multichannel digital audio subsystem with plug-in format and 32-bit 192 kHz support, it is a whole digital mixer in there. It takes me about 20 minutes to install MOTU drivers on a Mac and hook up through USB and FireWire and in no time I'm running Logic Pro and Ableton Live side-by-side and it all just works. It would be worth paying a premium for, but you don't because it is all the same Intel hardware. The software is essentially free.
> This is not an example of "giving the customer what they want".
In this you are 100% correct because you are not one of their customers. You bought a Windows PC.
> Free markets are supposed to be about choices. It's the lack of choices that has kept me from switching to Vista. After careful
> consideration, and despite the fact that I admire much about OSX, I choose not to use Macs because I don't want to be limited
> in such a way.
You bought a Windows PC with version 5.1 of the OS
Complaining that you would rather run the PS3 operating system or the Mac operating system or the iPod operating system on your Windows computer is pointless.
Earlier you blamed Apple for "deciding" that in order to use their OS you have to buy their PC. It is you who decided to buy a commodity PC. It is you who is to blame for the fact that your operating system choices are limited to commodity operating systems. Apple is not the only company to build specific OS for specific hardware, in fact, this is the typical method. The only company that does it the OTHER way is PART of Microsoft. It is not even all of Microsoft, because with XBox and Zune they are using the typical method same as Apple and Sony.
> I'm less certain of the long-term viability of the Macintosh platform now than I've been at any time since 1998.
Apple is selling more Macs now than ever. You buy a really good computer and it comes with tons of world-class software, and if you have other uses for it you can run Windows or Unix on it or do as you please. It's hard to argue with that compared to other name brands.
However if you are doing music and you're not using a Mac I truly think you are a mad man. CoreAudio is worth buying a Mac just to use it. It takes me 20 minutes to turn a stock Mac into a digital audio workstation using a couple of MOTU boxes and a handful of software installers and then it just works. It is easy to swap a Mac out for a new one and get more CPU because the IT overhead is almost zero, even in a music studio.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Captive market (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah, I know they've FORCED me to buy the upgrades several times now. Damn I wish I still had freewill...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
However, unlike Mac upgrades, the Vista/Office upgrade is designed to force an upgrade cycle, by that wonderful "incompatible" format structure. What do you get for your upgrade dollar? A more unstable system with a new UI to learn and ever ad
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Magnetic power cord: this should have been standard on all laptops a decade ago (my understanding is that that things like many cooking appliances have this). Preferably a unified connector, but that would be too much to hope for. So, a point for that.
Webcam: like you said, many laptops have it. It was fun for about a day with Photo Booth, but I haven't really used it since. Maybe if more people had one I would,
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Unfair comparison (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
What do you mean? There are probably at least 10 times as many new computers sold with Vista, as with OS X. If Apple had sold operating systems instead of mp3-players, they would have been bankrupt by now. On the other hand, Bill Gates is in no danger of being bankrupt soon.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Why is it so hard for you linear thinkers to imagine that there exist different ways to value one's work?
Re: (Score:2)
Competition v. Value (Score:2)
Re:Unfair comparison (Score:5, Insightful)
What do you mean? There are probably at least 10 times as many new computers sold with Vista, as with OS X
That's down from 20 times a few years ago. Two-thirds of the people in my office drop kicked their PCs and bought Macs in the last couple of years. That's a trend I'm watching first hand. Those who still want/need a new PC are trying to figure out where to get one with XP. They don't even WANT Vista but that's what's shipping now, like it or not. I've shown a few PC users XP under Parallels and they all had that "aha" moment. More switchers, albeit AC/DC.
Microsoft's MBU: The Mac's Fifth Column (Score:3, Funny)
Seriously, they do not share our values. They hate that we have good taste. They like to keep their windows maximized and their ligatures uncombin
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I take it you're living in the USA, right? While I don't in any way want to oppose your opinion, as I do believe that the trend you're watching is very much real, you have to think outside the box a little.
I live in a small and rather undeveloped country (but it's getting better); last week was the first time I have ever (!) seen a Mac. It was an iMac running Window
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
People know that Apple is cool. People know that Apple creates sleek Hardware and the ones that have taken
Re:Unfair comparison (Score:5, Insightful)
In my mind, there was never much of a doubt that Vista would do well. Microsoft just had too much momentum for it to flop. What's up the air right now, especially if it takes 5 years to come out, is Windows 7. MS's momentum is decreasing, and if they don't reverse the trend, then they eventually won't have enough to get another free pass like Vista. The fact that Vista didn't slow Mac sales is bad for them. Very bad.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Unfair comparison (Score:5, Interesting)
Paul Graham's article "Microsoft is Dead" [paulgraham.com] may be applicable here. For me, I'm no longer worried about buying another Windows machine (yes, I'm on XP right now) because I no longer use apps that are tied to Windows. In fact, as things go, I use fewer and fewer apps that aren't web based. I just don't need them any more. Beyond that, most of the apps I use have free alternatives and I use them.
The one proprietary application I still use is iTunes with my iPod. So a Mac machine might work for me next time around. I want one because they are so well designed, unlike this HP piece of junk whose battery doesn't make it an hour, and because friends and family have all had very good experiences.
Then again, I might just throw the whole lot out and buy something cheap and put Ubuntu on it.
Whatever the case, there's more to the equation than Bill Gates's relative worth.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
There are 18 times as many PCs as Macs
Sales of Vista rank only 10 times as much as sales of OS X
Steve Jobs is my Daddy (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, if the delay results in people putting off Mac purchases to avoid paying an additional $100 to get the latest OS; that can result in a drop in sales until Leopard is out.
Get the iPhone right and they'll have a HUGE winner on their hands. A million people have already queried AT&T about the iPhone through the notification list at Cingular, so who's your daddy?
Signing up for notification is
Indeed... (Score:5, Insightful)
Most users are happy with 10.4 and 10.5 is more of a luxury than a necessity. All this means is that 10.4 is sufficient that the general Apple buyer isn't screaming for OS improvements, but that the market may indeed be screaming for a decent mobile phone, like they were screaming for a decent MP3 player around when the iPod gained in popularity.
Anyway, a lot of the funds and improvements from the potential success from the iPhone will probably be funneled back into OS X and the Mac hardware. Haven't some of the improvements in 10.5, like Core Animation, been brought about due to the iPhone already?
Re: (Score:2)
Two things - It's a signal that Microsoft doesn't matter nearly as much as they used to. With the majority avoiding Vista like the plague, it's way down the cometitive radar screen for Apple which used to chase Microsoft. I'm sure everyone in Redmond smiled for a moment when the Leopard delay was announced... then sank into mild funk realizing Apple would be that much further ahead once the iPhone AND Leopard shipped in time for Vista SP1 - and the holidays.
Second, Apple is consciously missing the school b
Re:Indeed... (Score:5, Funny)
What can wait? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:What can wait? (Score:5, Funny)
BTW, don't take this to mean I'd ever be willing to come within 5km of a computer running it though.
Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)
Rumor has it monkeys might fly out of Uranus (Score:2)
Sure, there are probably some things Apple didn't show because they were not ready, interface stuff that they can build on top of resolution independent display for example, or a long list of desperately needed Finder improvements. The Mac rumor mill has been going on about secret features [arstechnica.com] ever since Steve Jobs mentioned those in the Leopard feature Keynote at WWDC last year. Well, device driver support for GSM/GPRS and mult
System Restore isn't equivalent to Time Machine (Score:3, Informative)
Time Machine [apple.com]
Leopard Technology Series for Developers [apple.com]
Time Machine [wikipedia.org]
Although System Restore on Windows is a useful concept on Windows, it's not designed as a bac
They're playing the hype (Score:5, Insightful)
Because the iPhone is on the news, tv, radio; everyone is talking about it. It is absolutely more important than OSX at the moment. The iPhone could potentially be Apple's new iPod.
Re: (Score:2)
A leopard is an animal related to cats (but bigger) living in parts of Africa and Asia. There are several varieties of them, living in different regions.
Because you are more interested in cell-phones than zoology?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
iPhone, OS X, what's the difference? (Score:2, Interesting)
On a related note, I can't wait until OS X and apps begin expecting high-res displays and multitouch input, making the marriage of OS to hardware ever more obvious even to the squarest of squares. Finally that ought to sile
Yes! (Score:5, Insightful)
Did nobody else notice that when Jobs announced the iPhone, he also renamed the company to take the word "Computer" out of it?
That sounds kind of, well, I dunno, strategic to me.
mod parent up (Score:2)
A bit too much drama (Score:2, Insightful)
I Think Their Excuse is Lame (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
A) if there are QA issues, finding the bugs is never a bottleneck; it's getting people to fix them. That means "tuning people" in to the project. People shifted to a mature project at the last minute are going to be much less efficient than those who were working on it, and can even be counterproductive.
B) If it's problems with some of the features or implementations, having more meetings is only going to slow t
Re:I Think Their Excuse is Lame (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
The reassignment of developers is what is concerning. It may be that they are wanting to get more people familiar with the mobile OS X codebase so that they can be ready to fix the bugs that will surface when it hits the market. But
Re: (Score:2)
If it's the same engineers doing work on both the iPhone and Mac OS X operating systems, it means that they can't physically two do things at the same time. The time spent to do A for OS X for the iPhone takes away from the time spent on B for OS X in general.
They had a choice of either releasing a buggy OS X in June or a better OS X in October. The iPhone excuse is valid because it's the same OS.
And it makes sense. If iPods curr
Re: (Score:2)
Leopard probably has some new features that haven't yet been released to the public, and at least one of those features has serious performance problems. They are probably rewriting a back-end
tiger (Score:2)
don't be so gullible (Score:5, Insightful)
Quite obvious... (Score:4, Insightful)
Release early, release often (Score:2)
They should release 10.5 right before Vista or right after it, with the flashiest features (the ones that increase wow-factor and are easy to do) thrown in and steal Redmond's thunder.
That way, they could even have more time to finish 10.6 with the real (i.e. versioned FS instead of time machine) features and still avoid Vista stealing OSX's spotlight (pun intended).
But that's just me. I bet they have very compe
Re:Release early, release often (Score:4, Insightful)
Apple makes more money on hardware sales than it does with software. Thus, it makes sense that the iPhone is a priority (if that is actually the case). Apple got a big hardware sales boost with switching to Intel. However many Mac users, such as myself, haven't upgraded to Intel machines because of the delay with Adobe CS3.
Leopard is icing on the cake, and I'm sure it's going to be great, but CS3 is going to sell many more new Macs than Leopard.
Re: (Score:2)
Leopard has the opportunity to sell Macs to Windows users.
If done with the right timing, it would inflict a huge damage on Microsoft, neutralizing the colossal effort to launch Vista.
The way it is now, all damage suffered by Microsoft at the Vista launch and after is self-inflicted.
They've BEEN doing that! (Score:5, Insightful)
During the last five years, Apple released major versions of OS X about every 1-1.5 years while all Microsoft had was XP. Third party developers were actually complaining because of the rapid pace of change of OS X. Before Tiger was released, Apple announced they would be slowing down the pace of their OS X releases. [eweek.com]
I'm disappointed that I have to wait longer than expected for Leopard, but I'd rather they ship it when it's ready-- besides, it's not like they had to scrap it midstream and start over, and then chop all the compelling features to make an already embarassingly late ship date.
It does make sense to focus on the iPhone right now, because the mobile phone market is much larger than the personal computer market. If Apple gets a nice foothold in it, it will mean more money for them to pour into expanding their presence in the computer market.
~Philly
Re:They've BEEN doing that! (Score:4, Informative)
Well, Jobs and his cronies found out that they really liked the big X, and quite frankly XI isn't that appealing, so they decided to name subsequent major versions as 10.2, 10.3, etc. Some day that will wear off, but meanwhile marketing-wise it's working. Minor (point) versions, the equivalent of a less-juicy but more-frequent Windows Service Pack, are named 10.x.y.
The best way to get your mind untangled is to look at Darwin [wikipedia.org], the underlying OS. It started with a major screw-up with the version numbers, but then Apple recognized that:
1) Darwin/Mac OS X is more a descendant of NeXTSTEP and OPENSTEP than of MacOS.
2) Puma (10.1) was more like a huge service pack for Cheetah (10.0). That's not true for the subsequent cats.
Thus, they revised the numbering so that Darwin would fit in the NeXTSTEP lineage. The Darwin versions and the corresponding Mac OS X versions can be found here [wikipedia.org]. Now you see that Jaguar, Panther and Tiger are all major versions.
(For another famous mash-up of version numbers, look at SunOS vs Solaris [wikipedia.org] and the jump of Solaris 2.6 to Solaris 7 [wikipedia.org].)
So, assuming that we can make a similar argument for Windows NT 5.1 (aka "XP"), since the year 2000 Microsoft has released:
Windows 2000 and 2000 Server (NT 5.0)
(Windows ME doesn't count, since it was not an NT).
Windows XP and Windows Server 2003 (NT 5.1 & 5.2)
Windows Vista (NT 6.0) (Longhorn Server may be released this year, or more likely next).
And Apple has released:
Cheetah + Server (I'm not counting Puma, which was anyway a free upgrade) (Darwin (screwedup-number)-5.x)
Jaguar + Server (Darwin 6.x)
Panther + Server (Darwin 7.x)
Tiger + Server (Darwin 8.x)
Leopard (+ Server) on October. (Darwin 9.x)
If you want to count all the service packs, MS made around 12 major+minor releases, Apple almost 40. But that's not very significant, since Microsoft packs more into each service pack than Apple does, and that's OK. Only major releases matter.
Re: (Score:2)
Now they are fallen, we realize it would have been much, much easier (or we could kick them a lot harder and a lot more).
That was a great wasted opportunity.
And don't tell me you don't love to kick their balls.
Follow the money (Score:2)
WIndows XP SP2 delayed Vista (Score:2)
getting the software retry for FCC testing. The Soft is not 100% done yet but needed to get it to a state in where the FCC can test I-phone out.
Re: (Score:2)
However, I would really surprised if Microsoft would claim Vista was delayed due to Windows Mobile.
The skillsets don't translate well between a small platform like handheld device and full desktop OS.
It's no longer the "Apple Computer Company" is it. (Score:3, Insightful)
AppleTV, iPod, iPhone, Airport, etc.... all complements to iTunes.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Captive markets... (Score:2)
However, Leopard is pretty much a point upgrade to an existing product; there's no threat to its market leverage apart from its successor, and most copies of it will be supplied with a new Mac - put simply, they an afford to let it slip as it's not as big a cash cow and isn't cracking open a new market for them. In fact for Apple, an OS
It's because of earnings (Score:2)
It's a not-so-transparent ruse (Score:2, Insightful)
All worked up for nothing (Score:2)
and really, I don't think anyone was expecting a release before
I was going to write my own comment... (Score:2)
Watch out for the iphone (Score:5, Interesting)
Just marketing (Score:2)
I see this as the opposite of Vista's release. Apple will release a mature, tested, stable product with actual usability improvements that runs *faster* on existing hardware.
ignore the hype (Score:3, Interesting)
My bet is that the big OS X secret is going to have something to do with new ways of interacting with the computer, using technologies developed expressly for the iPhone initially. All Apple products are high-touch/interactive; the iPhone is *especially* so. The computer and TV platforms can only benefit by that.
These are very exciting times in the OS world. We are *finally* beginning to get an OS that really lives up to everything an OS should be: stable, secure, great UI, intuitive, pleasant.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
If you have ever seen Apple Logic it is crying out for a touch screen. Acres of on screen knobs, sliders, buttons, switches. It is not the same UI as 1984. A multi-touch Mac would be very hip with DJ's and it is something that other PC makers can't match because Windows development is going nowhere.
> These are very exciting times in the OS world. We are *finally* beginning to get an OS
Wrong Assumption (Score:3, Interesting)
I think it's a cover. (Score:3, Interesting)
Keep in mind that Apple claims the iPhone is delayed until June because of the need for FCC approval... so which story are we supposed to believe?
Also, if you actually break down the time that Leopard has had for development... it's *much* longer than previous releases, and that doesn't have anything to do with the Intel work because Apple's been keeping things in sync for 5 years...
I'm skeptical of the announcement... Either Apple's dates have slipped, or they've got something big. It surprised me that Jobs stood up and said there were "Top Secret" features coming, so I hope he makes good on that promise... I expect the unexpected at WWDC in June.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Not to be trite, but... (Score:2)
That would have easily passed any decent spell checker. What you're probably thinking of is a grammar chacker, none of which are or have ever been very good.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If a Motorola phone can run Linux, most certainly an iPhone can run Darwin.
Even if it doesn't - and Apple goes a different route with the kernel - they still have the BSD layer and most of their userland stuff remains relatively portable as soon as you port the *Kit stuff.
As for the eye candy, it's easy to do decent 2D acceleration even on a low-power device.
I say they are still looking good on the iPhone front.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I dont see any harm in what apple is doing. Its loyalists can wait quite a bit for the next version of OSX. Its not like theyre going to jump ship to De
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:This piece doesn't make much sense.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, this announcement illustrates the difference between Apple fans and Mac fans. Apple fans like the decision because they feel that the iPhone would be a great product. The Apple fans are the ones saying that the delay of the OS is fine; OS X 10.4 is good enough for them. Apple fans like the idea of Apple becoming a consumer electronics company. Mac fans, on the other hand, don't really care about the iPhone. They feel that this decision is a slap in the face to Apple's loyal Mac customers, who want to prioritize a new phone over their long-standing product with millions of users. They'd rather see better Macs and improvements to OS X than to see a phone. Mac fans are worried that the Mac would be marginalized as Apple chases profits from MP3 players, phones, media center boxes, and other consumer electronics.
I fall in the Mac fan category. Personally, I'm starting to get worried about Apple's change from Apple Computer, Inc. to just Apple, Inc. At MacWorld 2007, not a single Mac product was announced. The only hardware update that we've received in five months was the updated Mac Pros that came out recently. Now OS X is delayed to work on a phone. I, and many other Mac users who have switched away from Linux, BSD, and other Unices, are not interested in Apple because of their phones, media centers, or MP3 players. We're interested in Apple because of their easy to use Unix with commercial software support and easy to use GUI applications. I hope the Mac doesn't become marginalized, but I already feel that it has by Apple's actions this year.
I'll just have to wait and see. But for now, although I like my MacBook, I'll be very careful to not be locked-in. Just as I switched to the Mac last summer from Windows XP and FreeBSD, I will switch back if I discover that Apple doesn't care about us.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Albeit smaller, more usable, and more affordable than the traditional Mac?