site_archiver@lists.apple.com Delivered-To: installer-dev@lists.apple.com /brad 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. _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Installer-dev mailing list (Installer-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/installer-dev/site_archiver%40lists.a... 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. On Dec 3, 2005, at 12:02 PM, installer-dev-request@lists.apple.com wrote: -Josh This email sent to site_archiver@lists.apple.com