Re:Microsoft Explains Why the Start Menu Needed to Die
by mikeash on Tuesday October 04, 2011 @09:02PM
(#3073685)
You can skip OS X release-level updates (they mostly aren't updates, just full installs), so it doesn't make sense to compare a leap from XP to 7 against upgrading a Mac to every release along the way.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Microsoft Explains Why the Start Menu Needed to Die
by vogonj on Tuesday October 04, 2011 @09:29PM
(#3073729)
hm, OK. in that case, I'll give Apple the benefit of the doubt and say that if 10.1 and 10.7 could possibly run on the same computer (since 10.1 was PPC-only, and 10.6 and 10.7 are x86-only), they'd let you upgrade directly for $30. thanks for the clarification. :)
(though, I'd still argue, an extra $70 per decade is not exactly breaking the bank.)
Re:Microsoft Explains Why the Start Menu Needed to Die
by DaveMebs on Tuesday October 04, 2011 @09:48PM
(#3073779)
I don't know about the overall upgrade pricing for OSX, but if you wanted to go from 10.4 to 10.6, they required you to buy the full suite with iLife and all for $129 or whatever it was. $30 upgrades are only supported if you upgrade every time.
Re:Microsoft Explains Why the Start Menu Needed to Die
by blrgeek on Wednesday October 05, 2011 @01:57AM
(#3074426)
Although not officially supported - it works - I upgraded straight from 10.4 - 10.6 last month.
Re:Microsoft Explains Why the Start Menu Needed to Die
by reemrevnivek on Monday October 10, 2011 @03:28PM
(#3095372)
This is only true if you want to have iLife. I personally don't use iLife, didn't when I was on 10.4, and upgraded to 10.6 from 10.4 for $30.