Re: Universal Binary and Mac OS X 10.2.8
Re: Universal Binary and Mac OS X 10.2.8
- Subject: Re: Universal Binary and Mac OS X 10.2.8
- From: Bradley Giesbrecht <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2005 19:03:44 -0800
Josh, I'm not saying your wrong, but I do think there are more things
to consider.
Windows Servers have always required more support man hours for me
and that
cost should be factored in somewhere.
And BSD/Linux has higher configuration costs and that should be
factored in as
well.
Now I know this can get painful when the new OS version doesn't
support your
hardware but on your duty cycle I don't think that would apply.
I personally would like to see Apple focus on improving performance and
capabilities rather then maintaining backward compatibilities and I
think they
have been doing a pretty good job of this.
/brad
On Dec 3, 2005, at 12:02 PM, email@hidden
wrote:
I have complained about the short lifetimes of the OS numerous times,
but nobody at Apple cares. For Apple it's a $$ thing because they
could have easily kept 10.3 until 10.3.whatever and added Spotlight
and such but they didn't because making 10.4 meant that users would
have to pay $$. How many years has OS X been around? And we've had
10.0, 10.1, 10.2, 10.3, 10.4, and next year 10.5? This is simply
insanity that `10.3 will be end of life next year. It's one reason
why I will always pick Windows over a Mac for an Enterprise level
application. Hardware lasts 3 years on our depreciation cycle. Should
I have to upgrade the server OS even once in that span? With Apple I
can get forced to do it twice if my timing is just right.. yey.
-Josh
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Installer-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden