"The features [that are known] were described as not groundbreaking. He went on to say, "It's sort of like (Windows) Vista to XP -- Leopard to Tiger.

never mind the fact that vista ultimate is almost $300 more than leopard ultimate.. oh, and leopard actually works.

"...and leopard actually works."

Well, not to slag Apple but this remains to be seen, especially in light of how Apple's been acting lately with/re the iPhone and iPod Touch. It could well be that Leopard includes a bunch of "features" that lock us into things we don't want to be locked into. Or the minimum requirements could be a cruel joke and it requires a brand-new mac to run properly.

I don't think this is the case necessarily - I'm just saying we haven't seen the final shipping product yet, and so can't make any evaluation.

Well it both is and isn't the same. XP certainly isn't 'good enough', as Windows was lagging well behind OS X - no system wide dictionary, no equivalent to Spotlight, no Expose - to name some useful features rather than eye-candy.

So XP to Vista should have been a huge leap. Not quite Classic to OS X, but after 5 years certainly as significant as XP itself.

Tiger to Leopard - well than's more like Win2K to WinME - a small intermediary release. We'll see the significance over the next 12 months though in third party software, just as we've seen with CoreImage in Tiger.

Quote

JulesLt wrote:
Tiger to Leopard - well than's more like Win2K to WinME - a small intermediary release. We'll see the significance over the next 12 months though in third party software, just as we've seen with CoreImage in Tiger.

ME was the update Windows should have never released. In fact of all the Windows releases, I still prefer 2000 over ME, XP or Vista.

Leopard as WinME to Tiger's Win2000?

I'll have some of whatever you're drinking...

I think we'll find that Leopard is to Tiger what Vista was supposed to be to XP; reports from the 'unofficial' testers are breathless in their praise of the speed, stability & polish shown in the new beta (I am *not* one of those, so I couldn't possibly comment) AS COMPARED TO TIGER.

Beyond that, I think the pundits (so-called are wrong when they suggest that 10.5 will not sell Macs or otherwise increase the Mac market slice. The Mac has been largely rehabilitated in the public mind (tho haters still lurk), and the tale of Vista has been so plainly a tale of Redmond chasing Cupertino that Leopard is firmly fixed onthe PC radar as something to watch.

An enormous number of savvy PC users did *not* make the leap to Vista; I am convinced that there is a general wait-&-see attitude that now leaves this undecided crowd expectantly wating to see what Apple has up its sleeve (MS having already dropped trou on Vista). If 25-30% of th wait+see brigade likes Leopard better than Vista, Apple's installed Mac base could triple in a fortnight.

Exit Vista, air hose cut...

Quote

Guest wrote:
"...and leopard actually works."

Well, not to slag Apple but this remains to be seen, especially in light of how Apple's been acting lately with/re the iPhone and iPod Touch. It could well be that Leopard includes a bunch of "features" that lock us into things we don't want to be locked into. Or the minimum requirements could be a cruel joke and it requires a brand-new mac to run properly.

I don't think this is the case necessarily - I'm just saying we haven't seen the final shipping product yet, and so can't make any evaluation.

Um, hold on a second. Leopard should be $129 like every update to OS X so far. Vista is usually sold with a new machine, with a *HUGE* discount. Vista Home Premium is around $60 in that scenario. Half the price of OS X.

Also, bear in mind that Vista's already sold 60 million copies, mostly on new computers, not retail.

How big is the entire OS X user base? I wish I could launch a product with that kind of "rocky" start...

Also, although others have mentioned it: JulesLt, ME was an update to 98, not 2000. And I agree, it should probably have never been released, tho the laptop I had with ME on it never gave me any trouble.

And one final point: Vista Ultimate is in reality a combination of Vista Business and Vista Home Premium--for most home users the Business portion is worthless--unless you're running an Active domain on your home network.

Quote

Anonymous wrote:
Um, hold on a second. Leopard should be $129 like every update to OS X so far. Vista is usually sold with a new machine, with a *HUGE* discount. Vista Home Premium is around $60 in that scenario. Half the price of OS X.

Also, bear in mind that Vista's already sold 60 million copies, mostly on new computers, not retail.

How big is the entire OS X user base? I wish I could launch a product with that kind of "rocky" start...