. . . that you get what you pay for! or as the old Chinese proverb says:

'Cheep ting no good'

Do any of these "analysts" take into account the $40-50/year for antivirus software? Granted free alternatives are available... But it's something that needs to be accounted for. And completely unnecessary on the Mac side.

Quote

L0u13 wrote:
Do any of these "analysts" take into account the $40-50/year for antivirus software?

Next Monday, Gene Munster will offer a long anticipated book report on The Cat in the Hat in which he concludes that his price target for AAPL is $99.

Quote

Bosco wrote:
Next Monday, Gene Munster will offer a long anticipated book report on The Cat in the Hat in which he concludes that his price target for AAPL is $99.

"2.25 years between major Windows releases, with an average cost of $114 per year for the full version, or $48 annually to keep up with upgrades"

As I recall, it was a heck of a lot more than $114 for XP. And if you don't include the long wait for Vista with its frequent delays, I'm not so sure 2¼ years is correct.

From what i understand apple puts out a new version of the OS every year, MS does not do this, there was Windows 95, 98, ME, 2000, XP, 2003 (directed towards servers)........... Vista?

ME was just 1998 with more bugs added.

You defenatly do not see a new os from MS every year, unless they count service packs which really are just bug fixes and maybe a few internal app upgrades (IE, WMP)

If i recall the only way you could get 2000, XP for under $299 was if you bought the OEM off of ebay, you can get this for about $130 from there, but you get no books etc. and most of the time it is distributed illegally (not sent with a piece of non MS hardware, i had this issue with ebay and was unable to use the OS for my company according to MS, i had to fight for 3 months with paypal to get a refund).

These are only a few reasons that i made the migration to Mac.

If this is correct, those numbers are gonna change!!

Full Version
•Vista Ultimate $450
•Vista Business $341
•Vista Home Premium $269
•Vista Home Basic $233
Upgrade Version
•Vista Ultimate Upgrade $269
•Vista Business Upgrade $224
•Vista Home Premium Upgrade $179
•Vista Home Basic Upgrade $116

He compared OS X to Windows HOME addition. It should be compared to the Professional edition, no?

You'd think you guys would eventually get wise to the analyst game. He set a target quite awhile ago. Now his future reputation depends on the stock meeting the target. So every 3 or 4 days, he issues a report with an increasingly meaningless indicator of how AAPL will jump from the $50-$70 range it's stuck in to $99, which would be a 40% - 100% increase in value depending on what you call the starting point. MacHeads are all happy with their cheerleader because AAPL stock success means sticking it to Bill Gates, apple pie, and an end to teenage pregnancy. Yet week after week, as AAPL goes up and down between $50 and $70, Munster offers new reports to give us all hope. To paraphrase the old Wendy's commercial, Where's the Beef?

Ahnyer points out that Munster's latest report is looking at old data, with new Windows pricing already announced and already taking away the supposed advanatages that Munster touts for Apple's premium OS pricing. BTW, does anyone remember when high TCO was generally considered a disadvantage? If anything, Munster's report confirms for me that Apple is playing to the small crowd that will pay for quality and style.They aren't going to suddenly convert the price conscious folk just because there is a hockey stick growth prediction for their market share.

and if you are talking about the windows vs apple upgrade you cannot compare like that because mac does not offer an upgrade, thier os is just priced at the upgrade price, windows upgrade disks are just that. I would always prefer a full install disk anyday over an upgrade. If you buy windows 98 and upgrade to windows 2000 then to XP, if you ever have to reinstall you have to reinstall each of them, with windows you are looking at an hour for each

I support Mac all the way now

I wonder how many consumers even bother to update to a new version of Windows on a PC? I'd be willing to bet that most people use the version of Windows that shipped with their PC, and the only time they get a new version of Windows is when they buy a new PC. How many consumers are even up to the challenge of installing a new version of Windows on an existing machine, especially when that means you need to reinstall virtually every single application you use?

It would be interesting to see what percentage of revenue Microsoft gets from Windows sales that doesn't come from OEMs. How many actual shrinkwrapped copies of Windows XP are ever sold? Given that virtually every PC that's still running today (i.e., how many 5+ year-old PCs are still in use?) is running XP, I can't imagine that it's very many.

Quote

ericmurphy wrote:
I wonder how many consumers even bother to update to a new version of Windows on a PC? I'd be willing to bet that most people use the version of Windows that shipped with their PC, and the only time they get a new version of Windows is when they buy a new PC. How many consumers are even up to the challenge of installing a new version of Windows on an existing machine, especially when that means you need to reinstall virtually every single application you use?

It would be interesting to see what percentage of revenue Microsoft gets from Windows sales that doesn't come from OEMs. How many actual shrinkwrapped copies of Windows XP are ever sold? Given that virtually every PC that's still running today (i.e., how many 5+ year-old PCs are still in use?) is running XP, I can't imagine that it's very many.

No, not necessarily. Although you can. The generally recognised way of doing it is to use Archive/Install method, which retains network settings and user files.

Here's Apple's note on it: http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=107120

It is possible to do a patch upgrade, but I've always had problems with it.

The nuke-and-pave option (aka Erase and Install) is the one which is the complete re-install from scratch.

Quote

codebowl wrote:
Couldnt you use these same drawbacks for the mac as well? if you buy Leopard wont you have to install everything again?

Quote

Small White Car wrote:

Quote

codebowl wrote:
Couldnt you use these same drawbacks for the mac as well? if you buy Leopard wont you have to install everything again?

No, you don't have to. You certainly CAN chose to do a fresh instal, reformat, and load everything again. But you can simply upgrade the OS around your apps if you like.

I think Windows offers similar options too, so I'm not sure what ericmurphy is saying, exactly. Perhaps the upgrade path for Window doesn't work very well? I'm not certain about Windows, but with OS X I know you can either upgrade or start over...your choice.

Quote

codebowl wrote:
From what i understand apple puts out a new version of the OS every year, MS does not do this, there was Windows 95, 98, ME, 2000, XP, 2003

Quote

Bosco wrote:
Munster's latest report is looking at old data, with new Windows pricing already announced and already taking away the supposed advanatages that Munster touts for Apple's premium OS pricing.

My old PC runs Win98/SE and does just fine. Microsoft knows this so they have discontinued support and so has Zone Alarm- the firewall people.
I bought a MacBook Pro in April (my first mac since a II/e way back when) and I love it. The only Microsoft I am still using is Excell 2004 which is a pain in the butt compared to the 2000 version. The only thing I miss--I miss like a farmer misses a toothache: bugs,spyware,bugs,viruses...........
Apple Computers Inc. is more profitable than Microsoft and I have no problem with this. Fine! I like the product a lot. To use the phraseology of the marketing people: "My computing experience has been significantly enhanced."
Cheers:
Bob

WetcoastBob, welcome to our forum community and welcome to the universal community of Mac users. I think you'll enjoy the stay.