Computer enthusiasts will often spend hours or days writing on a macro that saves a few seconds, and isn't used very often.
(It's hard to overestimate the cumulative effect of these tiny performance gains. Tiger continues that all round improvement, and feels crisp compared to Panther. The issue here isn't tempting Windows switchers, but whether an annual $129 can be justified.Ģ003's Panther release was everything OS X should have been in the first place, fixing many long standing performance issues. But even the first, barely usable version of Mac OS X boasted this when it first appeared March 2001. If Microsoft had announced that the next version of Windows XP would sleep and wake up within three seconds with near 99.99 per cent reliability, would pick up a WiFi network within 10 seconds with similar consistency, and was now free of viruses, then users would flock to upgrade. As OS X improves, it becomes harder to convince OS X users to make the jump. But Microsoft's Licensing 6.0 scheme has flopped even amongst business customers, not least because enterprises are sceptical that the company can deliver the goods within the lifetime of the subscription.Īpple has a different problem. It's also an opportunity to charge rent - and a predictable revenue stream is something software vendors have longed for years.
And it's a sensible occasion to introduce major system wide updates.
The ritual that we call the annual OS upgrade is Apple's best publicity showcase after January MacWorld - a chance to remind the world that it doesn't just make iPods. Review While the third update to Mac OS X, Panther, was an essential upgrade for Mac users, the fourth has presented Apple's marketeers with something of a challenge.
0 kommentar(er)
