Jasper

Here's the full price list: MacOS X 10.5 Leopard Ultimate Edition: 129$/99€ MacOS X 10.5 Leopard Business Edition: 129$/99€ MacOS X 10.5 Leopard Home Premium Edition: 129$/99€ MacOS X 10.5 Leopard Home Basic Edition: 129$/99€ MacOS X 10.5 Leopard Ultimate Upgrade Edition: 129$/99€ MacOS X 10.5 Leopard Business Upgrade Edition: 129$/99€ MacOS X 10.5 Leopard Home Premium Upgrade Edition: 129$/99€ MacOS X 10.5 Leopard Home Basic Update Edition: 129$/99€ MacOS X 10.5 Leopard Additional License (4) / Family Pack: 229$/175€ (this ia an estimated price by looking at Tiger's price). Is that a clearer way of telling how good it is to have one OS with graphic greatness and more features compares to the-one-where-you-spin-the-wheel-of-fortune. I especially love the 'didn't you make this?' part. Oh, and the euro-symbol is usually ALT+$, but I don't know if that's same for you British (hey, I have your pounds on my keyboard too, so it should only be rightfull).

Uhm, what... exactly?

I've already said that that's Apple's advantage anyway. HP and Dell might be underpricing. I'm not going to explain it all again, read my previous post.

I find the Plastic style less cluttery and more, say, modern. That's why I prefer it (and the reason I can't wait for Leopard). Good luck with your fancy new mac, Uzit! And try to do everything with it. You can't really break the operating system :wink:.

Why would it ever be bad to buy a computer and pay just one price for one OS? It's like getting Windows Vista® Ultimate Edition for the same price as the OS that's on your computer. You don't need to choose, you don't need to find what you want to do. You get the OS and can do anything a professional users could only do in Ultimate, and what a daily user could do with Home Basic. And you pay almost the same as Windows Vista® Home Premium. Limited? Peripherals always work on mac, there are barely any that work on windows that don't get a plug and play on mac. Software, okay, not as much, but if you're willing to cash out a little you get the same software, maybe even better. There's great software avaible nonetheless and more dvelopers are also looking at Mac as a possible platform. And the little choice in hardware? Sheesh. It's been spoken of so much, but in the end: it's what makes Apple such a profitable company. And it's what makes macs so great. The hardware and OS work so well together, well, it's what makes macs good. Don't get me wrong, I didn't say Windows® to be bad, I said that macs are good. And MacOS X cannot be ran on any other than Apple's official hardware. There are not many ways avaible to install the OS on other systems.

The OS basicly runs 32-bit, since 64-bit can also work 64-bit. Only, when you're on 64-bit, the OS will enable the script and systems that take advantage of the 64-bits. And off course, the applications. ANd by closer inspection, I think the dock in Leopard looks a little... ankward and ugly, actually. We'll see when it runs on my new mac in December.

Still, even Windows®-users have the nice plastic style, why can't we mac fans have our thing, too? It still looks butt-ugly compared to my standard firefox... And I disliked Safari ever since it annoyed me with it's slowdown when loading engadget and frequent errors when doing so, stopping the program to work. Personally, my mac isn't in that great shape, I think. But I treated it well... Ah well, I'll be getting a new one as soon as I get leopard on board with it.

Okay jordan, you're clearly anti-mac. You're the entire opposite of Takeo (here comes a wink to you, Takeo: :wink:). OS X 10.4 Tiger introduced great new features and at school i'm using 10.3, and that really feels like a step back. Apple's updates aren't Service Packs. Service Packs barely introduce new features, they're just there to fight the newest malware on your computer. But the OS X updates are really quite good and the stuff they introduce with Leopard are great. It looks the deal, too, and it now has chosen an consistent design with all windows (Wich is Plastic, and it still looks great even though i've used it for years with mail). Apple leapfrogged over Windows because Vista just caught up with MacOS X 10.4 Tiger - wich means that adding anything is again an jump forward. But it just has great possibilities. Apple just showed off Leopard with grace. it looked the deal, it had great new features, a good look - it's another improvement on an already great operating system. Vista is on par with Tiger, but Leopard is just-that-step-ahead. You know, you said that every major OS release of Windows was a rewrite - but that isn't true. Microsoft just made a huge mess with their Longhorn development. XP shouldn't have been on the market this long (you can see what it does - people aren't eager to switch to Vista), but they messed up the first code and then chose to rewrite everything. But Apple rewrote an old OS (Tiger) last year - 80 million lines of codes, made for Intel processor. Isn't that a major rewrite? But they just made it so and didn't release it as a new OS. Microsoft has had three major rewrites of their OS - their old NT-system (95, 97, 98, Millenium Edition), then their CE-code (2000, XP) and now their Vista. You can't blame Apple for doing the Wow, but just now. Without a doubt they just jumped over Microsoft again, but heck - that's the purpose of being an underdog - you have to stay ahead of the rest, everytime again. Apple, on the other hand, knows marketing and didn't show of it's Wow a year before launch, they do it just months before it. And the hype machine keeps working. And iMacs G3 were released in 1998 - they can't even handle 10.4 properly anymore, so if you still have such a system, it's just time to switch over to a newer one, since you are way out of your time here. Don't forget that these are the first macs incompatible with a new OS - they made it work for the last four iterations. Those computers are just not good enough anymore. Now were's that beta copy I was looking for?

Safari is fast when started up on Windows (faster than IE7, in my personal experience), but starting it takes too long. I personally have an opinion here: If they would use the GUI graphics that are already in Vista or XP, it would be a ton faster. I've got the same experience with iTunes and Quicktime on Windows. On mac all these services work like a treat, but it's very sad that the update to Safari 3.0 Didn't change the visual interface at all (it's still brushed metal, while I'de rather have the plastic look they're pushing in Leopard - and the look is already in there, mail.app uses it).

I did find it hard to think of how you could cram all pages of yore into that navigation, but the fact is proven to me. It looks pretty damn well and people can make their way around the site. Hope the local sites get an update soon, too.

Bit it fits within the Apple product style (check iTunes and Quicktime). They built in their own nifty theme (and I can honestly say: Plastic Aqua looks, in my opinion, loads better than XP AERO GLass. Glass is such a cluttery interface - but Apple's looks smooth and simple to navigate. But that wasn't the point. Apple won't adopt to the Windows Vista style, soon. I have tried Safari on Windows too, now, and I seem to remember why I switched to Firefox on mac. Because safari isn't always that fast, accurate. Apple may 'prove' a lot with their testing, on my parents' windows XP, it loads much slower. But on the other hand, Jordan, it doesn't mean nothing can be faster than IE7! Using those boot-loading application (quick starts), they can make any program run just as fast by requiring image cache for it. So don't be to narrow-minded there, pally. Or just don't be so narrow minder over the macpc thing.

Cover Flow ain't an app, it's a way of viewing inside Finder. And Finder can do the thing you described over there. I can't help but want to get my hand on Leopard nonetheless. If I'm lucky a pal of mine gets hold of it before you can say 'cheetah!'.

Except for the neatiest finder - ever - no big revelations. I do like everything they said and I'll be post-ponning my buy of a new mac untill they ship Leopard on all Macs. Wich means I'll be getting it in December or something. Looking forward to it! Also, wonder how safari will work on Windows... But I doubt they'll really increase marketshare. The cards in the music business were different when Apple launched iTunes and they had a huge advantage over all the rest back then, but Safari isn't really a necessary switch, I guess. We'll see how it works out.

It didn't say it happened, it said that Steve said he'd do it. That doesn't mean he has done it yet.

Isn't that only in your slideshow? No I want a dedicated service. I don't even want to buy online - I want to play them with ease.

I'de love to see them increase the internal memory. Make it possible to play your MP3 library in a specific channel? Read CD's and DVD's (but that means licensing cost...)? I'de just love to see it happening, actually. But for now, I'm just going to see what the big N makes of it.

Shut up, you're not worth anything! I hate hate you! I hate you! I HATE YOU! Wait. That didn't happen in this thread yet, no? Ah well - we'll all share our Apple love and it has surprised me that the Windows-fans haven't given up on us just yet. There's never really any discussion about Windows here, no? Always Apple, shmapple. Macs, Shmac. Mac OS X. Shma... okay, that one doesn't work that way.

Go to the settings, memory settings, Memory Card, gameCube memory cards. It's fairly straight-forward and is is the same as GameCube's system. Just find it in your memory, in your settings (they're on the bottom-left of the Wii menu).

Traitor! Traitor in our own house! Kill him! Burn him! Hit him with a stump object and get Horatio to solve the murder using the world's best crime-lab working overtime and twenty times as fast as it would in real!

I guess you've stopped reading two posts ago.

Are there going to be .mac announcements? They haven't changed the service for years - so what would they change from it? Maybe expand it and give it free with every mac for a year. That would be nice.

have you ever thought in the popposite direction? Maybe Dell and HP are charging below the prices they can ask for it and almost make zero profits. On the other hand, we all know that Apple hardware is pricier. Apple is the only company in the world that can afford to make their prices so high and lose nothing of income (they've even sold more the last few years than ever before). Apple's just in this luxorious position. Because in the end, people are buying macs. But in my opinion the battle is over the regular consumer. Mostly because the non-regular consumer, the professional, has set it's mind on an OS anyway. it's about convincing the regular ones that macs make it easier for them them their boring Windows computers. And that's what the ads do.

I think I pointed out that wishing for a greener Apple doesn't make it green yet.

Thats not what Greepnpeace said. Okay, Apple sais they want a greener Apple, but okay. Still a lot of work to do just now, before they really make those Granny Smith's green. >>And Al gore isn't all that eniromentally friendly, either.

Not in sense of need, in sense of PR. It's just so much better to act like the strong man. If you start insult instead of arguments, you're PR points go down with ten. But that happens if they have low EXP (but lucky, they both got high HP - okay, Microsoft has moist Coin).