Honestly, I don't think customers really care about Snow Leopard, and as you say, it has a lack of new 'features', or at least ones that consumers understand. Apple barely marketed Leopard when it came out either - the marketing has always been on the iPhone or the Mac as a system.

It's software that sells computers and consoles, rather than the operating system itself.

For most consumers, an update to iLife is actually more the kind of 'features' they are looking for - automatic tagging of photos for Facebook, etc - and I think Apple have succeeded there. It's also a showcase for the technologies they introduced in Leopard (such as Core Animation).

Now while I agree that Windows 7 really does close a lot of the visible gap between Windows and OS X, as far as I can see, that software gap is still going to exist.

Where are the apps that showcase Vista and Microsoft's latest development frameworks in the same way iLife and iWork do?
MS Office is not a showcase for .NET 3. C#, and WPF.

Also, if improved performance means extended battery life, and a new lease of life for ageing hardware, then I'll certainly be in the queue.

Yeah, announce Snow Leopard before it's done. That will be generate positive press and excellent revenues. Better yet, start selling it before it's ready.

And who wants to buy an OS upgrade that significantly improves performance, feel and stability?? That would be NUTS!?! Everyone knows that the Microsoft model of delivering bigger, more bloated, slower upgrades are what economy-weary consumers are hankerin' for.

Leopard came out well after Vista yet did quite well for Apple. Getting SL working well before selling it makes better sense. And just because Microsoft announces things years and years ahead of time, announcing features and making claims they often can't deliver doesn't mean it's a good idea.

Take of those d@mn Microsoft goggles.

Bot
Confused, Bemused Mac Fanbot

apple it's 4 years beyond microsoft.

No, 6 years.

It is very sad that Apple has painted itself into this corner -- where the only two possible dates in all of 2009 to announce Snow Leopard are today and January 24.

... and with no MacWorld Expo next year and no major Apple anniversary, there won't be a single date in 2010 for them to announce Snow Leopard next year! My god(s)! What will they do?

Joe, with all respect, you seem not to really understand Apple’s position on the market.

Apple has outgrown the market last few years, it clearly has no crisis with its operating system, hardware nor with its image. There is no reason for overly hurrying to release the new operating system before Microsoft does. Apple has the position of choosing it’s time table freely.

You are wary of Snow Leopard sales, even if Apple did not sell a single retail copy of Snow Leopard, it would not be a problem for the company. What Apple sells is complete solution (in form of Apple computers) not software. Retail sales of Mac OS are a drop in the ocean compared to hardware revenues generated by Macs, iPods and iPhones..

I do not really get the grim picture you are painting about Windows 7 affecting Apple. As I see it, Mac customer base and Windows customer base do not overlap much. Windows 7 may become better than Vista and XP, and it may match or even exeed *some* of the features of current OS X, but that is just not enough. It needs be *clearly* better than Apple’s offerings to have any effect on Apple’s current customer base. On the other hand, the people who are most pissed with Windows, and most likely to switch, are probably not the first in line to purchase Windows 7.

Regarding to the Mac Box Set, it was introduced not to milk revenue out of Leopard but because it wants to sell the iWork and iLife pacages, which require Leopard. Snow Leopard time table has nothing to do with that.

Snow Leopard will be released when it is ready *and* Apple has a hardware lineup that completely supports OpenCL.

Fuck Microsoft

Apple should worry?

A used car salesman on crack pushing a chrome platted turd with some wannabe Apple lipstick will appeal to the single digit IQ crowd. Obviously this isn't Apple's target audience. You have to be well into the three digits and have the ability to actually make money not some retard living in your mom's basement, Windows is these losers speed.

Joe, An ebbing tide strands all boats. MSFT's going to have to double their Vista marketing $$ to get as many 7 buyers as there were for Vista, at launch. That's a billion dollars--to entice an upgrade during a general depression. Good luck to them.

MSFT's business customers will pare back, too. They're also the ones most irritable that their Windows machines are more Mac-like; something 7 promises to be. Too bad, too, that MSFT's 64 bit upgrade path isn't straightforward.

Ballmer's windmilling arms and chair tossing should keep more people from switching. Just you wait and see.

Mr Wilcox is obviously neither a business analyst, nor a technologist. Merely a self-promoting pundit spreading classic FUD. Journalists often manage to move into areas they clearly don't understand. As long as Mr Wilcox misinformed speculation draws viewers to the site to generate advertising revenue, he'll continue to write this nonsense.

This isn't just peddling FUD. Do you understand anything about Apple's business?

Let's start with the obvious: "Apple can sell upgrades, at least. Or can it? Normally I would say absolutely yes." Then normally, you'd be an idiot. Selling operating system upgrades has *never* been an important source of revenue for Apple. Ever. The vast majority of Mac users get their software upgrades (as opposed to updates, of the 10.X.X sort) via the purchase of a new Mac, not a standalone box. If you knew anything about Apple's business, that would be at the top of the list.

Snow Leopard isn't, has never been, and has never been marketed as, an important consumer product release. MacWorld was never the ideal venue for its release. That would be WWDC, where the improvements that are being made "under the hood," as it were, would have serious relevance to the audience.

That's assuming, of course, that the release of 10.6 comes that late. Apple releases now on their own schedule. Snow Leopard could come essentially any time.

"The Mac Box Set foreshadows that Snow Leopard isn't coming anytime soon." No, no, it doesn't. It indicates that Snow Leopard isn't ready to ship today. Since Apple has already announced that MacWorld is no longer relevant to their product release schedule, whether any products were announced at the keynote has precisely zero relevance to a release date for anything that wasn't talked about.

"Tomorrow, Microsoft almost certainly will announce Windows 7 Beta 1, as the company ramps up for the software's release, possibly as early as midyear." Yeah, I'll hold my breath on that one.

As long as Apple vocal fans keep spreading the same propaganda about how superior OS X and how Windows is still Windows 95, Apple has little to worry about. They can keep selling obsolete hardware at premium prices forever.

Actually, Apple has not let the cat out of the bag, at least not yet. While January 24 is the literal 25th anniversary, we're really talking Super Bowl Sunday. The best scenario I could come up with would be to announce Snow Leopard and a new Mac Mini. Not a prediction, a dream fantasy.

It's not about the consumer right now. It's a contest between Apple and Microsoft. I'm amazed by the number of people who are unaware of Windows 7. I'm not amazed that far fewer people have heard of Snow Leopard. Right now the two companies are positioning themselves for the next battle.

Apple miss an opportunity to announce Snow Leopard ahead of Windows 7, which will get talked about today. How far will Steve Ballmer go? We'll know tomorrow. I've seen August 2009 as a much talked about release date for Windows 7, but with the new rumors of free Windows 7 for computers purchased after July 1, that date gets pushed out some.

Dreaming again, it would be great to see a battle royal occur during the next holiday season. Perhaps neither side will be ready by then. So this conversation will get stretched another year. Not much to look forward to.

The economy has changed enough to cause both sides to re-evaluate their strategies. Joe seems to think it will hurt Apple more than Microsoft. I'm firmly in the I don't know camp. The Net Applications data that everybody seems to love to hate, has taken an interesting turn. The Mac market share has had larger than normal increases the last two months in a row. And it has come at the expense of Windows XP.

The next benchmark for me will be the quarterly sales data, publicly available towards the end of January. Everybody is going to be off a little, except maybe Acer. That will set the stage for the next round of this battle.

Microsoft's market share has come from having it's OS put on nearly every non-Apple machine sold, having users putting up with it, and then hoping people don't switch.

Apple's growth has come from people getting Apple's OS on their Apple machine, having users loving it, and then telling others how it is well worth the extra money.

For Apple to stop gaining ground because of Windows 7, people are going to have to:
1) Stop loving Mac OS X; and
2) Love Windows 7.

And "loving Windows 7" is different than people merely loving that it's not Vista.

I just don't see this happening anytime soon.

Maybe, when I replace my current hardware in a few years, I'll be running Windows 7 on a VM under Snow Leopard. Just like I'm running XP on Parallels under Tiger now. I just want something that's stable and meets my needs.

Windows 7 might come first, but in the minds of most people (I think), Microsoft MUST release this, as not even marketing has really helped improve the publics image of Vista. Just as a funny side note, yesterday we introduced a new internal program and as an acronym named it VISTA, after much discussion, the worries were not about lawsuits or using a name that's been out there, it was agreed VISTA sounds "cool", but the idea was dropped due to "people already have a bad taste of the Vista OS" and that might decrease the use and popularity of the program. Apple and OS X, on the other hand is stable as is, sure, a new update would be nice, but we can wait a bit. ...I have nothing against the Vista OS, I really like it, just going based on what I've heard.

Apple/Mac's worldwide market share has "skyrocketed" all the way to 3%, so it clearly has nothing to worry about. (grin)

Snow Leopard progress is still behind the times, it can't even boot the 64 bit kernel on some of the new and older Core 2 Duo Mac's. The fact that its minor release might also point to why its not getting much publicity. A lot of its features are more business focus: better integration with Exchange using native OS X Apps such as Mail, iCal and Address Book, addressing larger amounts of memory, ZFS read and write, tighter Active Directory integration.

I suspect when Snow Leopard is launched expect to see Apple make an aggressive push and sell to the corporate market. Its a possibility that Apple might make both Leopard and Snow Leopard co-exist for a while, possibly pushing it on new Mac's and keep Leopard around for Tiger users. There are still a bunch of them out there who have not upgraded. My friends first gen MacBook Pro is still running Tiger.

Why did you chose to compare the $600 to $700 price of Windows notebooks to the $1299 MacBook price instead of the $999 MacBook price? I feel comparing price alone is useless. People buy Macs not just for the hardware. The OS and apps it comes with are the bigger reason. Apple continues to sell their products despite what the media likes or dislikes about either company. Apple also makes a healthy living on their smaller market share. People pay the "tax" because the product is what they want. MS has their own "tax". Just look at the number of XP and Vista versions and their different prices. I'd like to see an article refer to MS's OS pricing as a tax?

Wow, just look at the dissapointed and yet so rabid iBoi's coming out.

Snow Kitty as was Leopard will be Fart in the Wind and that's the case for the forseeable future.

Jobs had a huge windows to mount a full scale assault on Redmond during 06-08 where the Vista/Windows sucks bleat was at its highest.

Instead the preener that he is, refused to enter mid range desktop and netbook markets. That and the fact their iToi's are pulling into $$$ compared to the Mac side might be factor.

Either way, Win7 flywheel is about to cranked up tonight and it'll take an act of god to slow it down. OEM's are salivating over the thought of having something other that toxic 'Vista" brand to tout.

Dryer, you're new at this, aren't you?

Apple says very little, then when people get their hands on it, the are generally impressed. Microsoft pre-announces, boasts, leaks, and people are disappointed. That's the way it has worked up til now.

Absolutely Frank. I was just going to post the same about the comparison made in the article. There is no sensible reason to compare completely dissimilar products.

My problem is that I think that either the writer hasn't actually done their homework and that is disappointing, or, they are making an unfair comparison simply to push their own PoV.

Then, if you want to compare like with like, give or take a few issues then comparing Dell and Apple for very similar computers we have $999 vs $850 both without any additional software (ie no MS Office) but no equivalent of iLife with Dell. Well, you pay for what you want.
Obviously, I'm not saying Apple are cheap. If you want cheap get a no name. But if you want good information I wouldn't look at this article either!

Mac sales are growubg at a rate of three time the rest of the industry. Releasing Snow leopard before it's ready will give Apple it's own Vista Nightmare.

In a quickly expanding market, marketshare is a secondary or even tertiary concern.

In the 80s and 90s, a platform's failure to capture a significant share of the total market spelled doom, due to the small total size of the market. Now a sustainable and growing userbase is possible without "controlling share".

Moreover, the standardization of file formats, communications protocols, and physical connectors has further eroded the importance of one platform over another.

To quote Steve Jobs, You must let go of the idea that for Apple to win, Microsoft must lose.

As the market expands from it's 50s-90s focus on corporate sales into consumer sales - Microsoft can continue to grow - and so can Apple. Why? because corporate sales aren't going to start shrinking just because consumer sales picks up.

Winsows 7 will sell in corporate environments at the same rate Vista has, and that XP, 2000, 98, and 95 did.

I don't believe in any religion; not Christianity, not Hinduism, not MacApple, not Microsoft. I do want a computer that will do what I want when I want - reliably for years.

I've got an iMac at present but my next computer will be a Windows-7-running PC desktop as long as the promise that the pre-beta and beta 1 seem to show is realized in the final product (as it wasn't in Vista).

Why did I buy an iMac? The time had come to change my computer and I wasn't about to spend my time trying to overcome the faults and foibles of Vista. At that time, Apple's 'it just works' slogan seemed to ring true but it doesn't any more. 'Leopard' has been bug-ridden from the start and the latest update (10.5.6) is junk. In fact, I've stopped applying updates to my iMac. Several things have never been right on my iMac (permissions, screensaver, and sleep among them). Despite what Apple fans say, there is no viable Mac equivalent of Microsoft Money and no up-to-date OCR program. My office suite is Microsoft Office 2008 for Mac!

So, after 12 months with an iMac, I'm waiting for PCs with Windows 7 to appear and then I'll get one (changing early). I've used many computers and OSs in my time but now I want a simple life with a machine and OS that I can rely on and that are easy to use. Given Microsoft's business behaviour, I wish that machine ran OS X or Linux but they both have severe disadvantages that I'm not willing to put up with in my declining years. Roll on Windows 7!

Norton is a Troll

Wilcox, you're just a tool. Apple will not release SL before the WWDC this summer. That was the plan, that is the plan. As to Microsoft's 'guerilla' marketing against Apple, they have to say something negative, because they have no new products -at all- to release except a beta of an OS that won't be RTM until this time next year. Building excitement around W7 by releasing it to P2P networks is hardly the way to market a flagship product. Honestly. Also, I wish you and the rest of the Microsoft shills would stop with 'Macs cost more - PCs cost less' FUD. Yeah, PCs cost less, bargain basement intro crap that won't even run XP, let alone Vista, cost less. But, machines that match Apple's line-up, spec-for-spec, cost more from all the major players. Do your homework for once.

Remember, Apple is just improving performance and the amount of space it takes and yes adding little to no new features. But, features are being taken out of Windows 7 that were in Windows Vista. MSFT maybe changing them to Live Apps, but it not like Apple how it's ready out of the box. If you want Windows Movie Maker, Photo Gallery, etc, you have to download it, which can be a hassle.

Apple is taking a break to optimize performance and to make OS X more maintainable. Snow Leopard will have an API (Grand Central) that will let developers optimize their programs for multi-core, multi-processor systems, and a method (OpenCL) for off-loading mathematical operations to the GPU. Windows 7 won't have that. Snow Leopard will run rings around Windows until Microsoft untangles their spaghetti.

OS X has a consistent and complete API, and gives its development tools away for free, which makes it easier to develop for OS X. The UI is more consistent across OS X applications, except for Adobe and Microsoft.

Leopard is already compatible with Active Directory, Snow Leopard will be compatible with Exchange, and Apple has an alternative to every Microsoft technology. Snow Leopard marks Apple's invasion of the enterprise--it has already begun with major clients such as the US Army.

With Microsoft, you have to get Windows support from the OEM, but with Apple, you don't even have to know whether it is a hardware or a software problem.

That endless line of security updates gives the impression that Windows is a work in progress.

Windows pesters the user with notifications that things went right. (Do I really need to be notified that I plugged in a USB device, that Windows is searching for drivers, or that the device works? I already know all that stuff.) It also prompts the user too many times for the same operation. (Click to start. Click to validate. Click to accept the license. Click to acknowledge the warning that it could be dangerous. Click to continue. Finally it works!)

Windows is designed for customers, not users. Somehow I get stupid on the way home from work so far as Microsoft is concerned and need a dumber OS that omits features I need. Why not one version for everyone and let everyone uses what they need?

Windows is schizoid: XP suggests naming my computer "The Smith Family Computer" but tells me to consult my system administrator.

Windows has unnecessarily verbose and incomprehensible error messages, and keeps trying to teach me computer science when I use the help feature. Didn't it occur to Microsoft that I just want to get it to work?

Microsoft will continue to dominate, but its market share will decrease. Dell or HP or someone will customize a Linux distro and imitate Apple's hardware-OS integration, so Microsoft will see more competition on more fronts.

Microsoft won't die, we will just wish it would

Why, oh why do you let the Microsoft crowd stir you up? I was around when most of this was invented and was a softie for years. I even hard an old WFW bug named after me. That said, I switched to a MAC about 3 years ago. I use Linux and Vista on my MAC running VMware. I can't imagine going back to a WinPC. I just like the MAC and the integration of everything MAC and I will pay a tax for that in green instead of wasted time. Some people won't pay the green and some people won't want to do things the Apple way. They can always serve as a sanity check. Apple works for me and the other guys opinions are interesting. I don't need to defend Apple or attack Microsoft, I just need to continue as freelance consultant making in the mid-six digit range.

Joe, you must be kidding. The current release of OS X is not in dire straits as Vista is, so to suggest Leopard is an endangered species is really ridiculous (unless you need something to write about).

Unlike MS, Apple does not need a cash cow in their operating system. It's important, but you clearly don't understand Apple's modus operendi.

You and other tech journalists continue to boggle your own minds with made up scenarios which seldom play out; such as "The Mac Box Set foreshadows that Snow Leopard isn't coming anytime soon" AND "Apple has made a strategic error by not getting in front of Microsoft, which is ramping up anti-Mac marketing and building some excitement around Windows 7".

Really? Excitment huh. Wow. Guess we will all plan to see thousands of people lining up for that one. These statements are devoid of facts.

Guess that's your game, and that's okay.

At work, I manage all the laptops, all of which run Windows. I'm also the Microsoft Partner administrator. I'm MCP. I was a Vista beta tester.

But I secretly do all my work on my MacBook Pro, which is hidden under my desk. All anyone sees is the keyboard, monitor, and mouse.

What the article seems to miss is the total cost of ownership. Hardware is such a small cost of computer ownership that it isn't funny. As an IT Director, I am a bit tired of paying the Microsoft tax. Vista and Office 2007 are both a step backwards, in my book. The CEO finally bought a couple of Macs to try them out. He hooked his Mac up to the network at one of the branch offices and when he went to print, the network printer was just there. He didn't have to configure it. He didn't have to load drivers. He didn't have to do squat. Try that on a PC. How much time did IT spend on the problem? None. There goes my job.. ;-)

I have been in IT for 20 years now and worked with PC's, Macs, UNIX boxes, and mainframes. The only Microsoft products that I am a fan of are Exchange and SQL Server. For everything else, I'll go Mac, if I have my choice, or possibly Linux, if I don't have my choice.

At first sight it seems amazing that for an OS that has a whole 3% of the market any critisism brings an immediate rebutal, in less than flattering terms, from so many people. But then the replies show that what we are dealing with are people who have yet to grow up. I say this because there is no such thing as a perfect OS, not even OS X 10.x.x nor Windows 7, they are all compromises and when you finally grow up you will learn that constructive criticism is to be appreciated. Meanwhile the 97% will quietly continue to use an OS that meets their requirements with no need to pay a premium for the hardware that it runs on.

I was one of the ("new converts") XP people who got macs for the first time because of some very fabulous advertizing and Apple's image as a company with superior products. But after 1 year of using a Mac, I have come to believe that a computer is a computer is a computer.
Latest OS whether it is windows or OSX, would always have learnt something from its predecessors and competitors and in some extent would be better. Some new OS represent a big step forward (windows XP or leopard), others a small step (vista or snow leopard). Microsoft suffered because they took a small step forward with XP when Apple took a big step with leopard and now it is Apple's turn to suffer when Microsoft takes a big step with Seven vs Apple's small step forward with SL.
I went for a better product swiching to Mac at that time when time comes around for my next computer, it won't be a Mac just because I am a mac user. It will be whichever is a better product at that time in both features and value. Whether it is a PC or a Mac, because a computer is a computer is a computer.

I'm sorry, Danny, but you've been in IT for 20 years, you're an IT Director, and you think that the auto-installation of a network printer is a game changer? (Windows XP and Vista can both also do that, provided that the driver exists on the system -- just the same as a Mac.)

Mac has gained sales in the home market, but it is still very much a home system. It will never make significant headway into the business world so long as it continues to suffer from the same problem it's had since the PC began to dominate: lack of software support.

Mac has a presence in some businesses (e.g. publishing, media), but until there is a major shift in the development of applications for all industries for Mac, it simply will never supplant Windows. Dual-boot, virtualization, or emulation will not overcome this because it brings up a whole new world of costs: training, compatibility configuration and testing, and, yes, licensing costs (you still have to pay for that virtualized Windows license, CALs, etc.). And as long as you're buying the Windows version of an application to run virtualized/emulated, the developers have no incentive to develop a native Mac version.

Personal preference is one thing, but a business decision is another matter entirely. I'm no Microsoft cheerleader: just practical. And in business, the bottom line is the TCO for Windows PCs is still way lower than Mac. If it wasn't, you would have seen Fortune 500-types making the switch to Macs.

If Apple wants to supplant Microsoft, I think they would have to start throwing more of those profits at incentives for developers. But to really branch out would probably mean relinquishing some of their tight controls, and that would mean that in a few years they'd probably end up with... Windows. Market dominance may not be all its cracked up to be.

Personally, I think Jobs is content to keep Apple as a niche player, because they're making nice profits and he gets to keep a close eye on all of his toys.

Leopard is supported by Macs that are 6 years old. So what about MS's 18 months. So what about all your articles. You are a paid troller.

Mr Wilcox,

You should really, really take a close look at what many of the commenters have posted, especially Jonathan. You can't look at Apple Products the same way you look at Windows. The customer base is not even close to being the same. Bad economics or not, you don't see Mercedes (as an example) hurrying up to get out a $15,000 model. Not saying that the difference is that large, but this is the point. Apple has never looked to overtake PCs or Windows, they are happy with a product that is at least perceived to be superior and has a solid niche market.

Frankly as the columnist charged with covering Apple, you would think that you'd have a better grasp of this point which has been at the heart of what Apple is since the return of Steve Jobs. Please don't discount this as a fanboy rant, this is just from someone who has worked with Macs and has built PCs.

Certainly the announcements of the other day were sparse, but not going to MacWorld has nothing to do with them being able to get the word out about new products. Did you not notice the lines formed when Apple did their own announcements surrounding iPhones and iPods? They don't need MacWorld to make a splash and will no longer go to it.

Oh yes, Snow Leopard is not that big of a deal to the Apple community as Leopard itself has been a resounding success.

I must agree with several commenters who said that this particular post is laden with Microsoft-favorable FUD.

"Microsoft's Macintosh Business Unit touted Office usage on Apple computers: 77 percent of U.S. Mac users."
How many of these people use Office to be compatible with their Windows-based work environments?

"Meanwhile, Windows 7 has got some glitzy new features that promise to improve usability and bring some fun back to PCs."
Isn't that what they said about Vista two years ago (the "Wow" campaign)? Isn't that what the more recent "Mojave" ads tried to prove?

The IT professionals know better, and the general public will not care, about any announcement this far in advance of Windows 7 RTM.

I was ready to spring for a New iMac after hearing that Jan 09 would bring an update, more for one's money. Since this has not happened and I read about dissatisfaction with OS X, I will wait until windows 7 is out. Perhaps, by then, the iMac line will offer more possibilities.

@Danny.

You're kidding right? About adding network printers?

You're an I.T. Manager? Who works for you? A bunch of morons who can't write a logon script?

Any one of my users can log in anywhere on our network and have a printer at the nearest location auto-mapped to either their user account or the computer they logged into depending on location. (Loopback policy processing in GPO. Look it up.)

In addition they can go to our Intranet and click a link on any number of printers and have it auto connected.

And TCO savings? Are you serious? A large percentage of my windows users use virtual PC's hosted on VMWare. My management costs are seriously minimized. Can you run in a VMware hosted Mac enviroment? Until you can you need to shelve that TCO argument. In this age of VDI the game has changed.

So you say: "Tomorrow, Microsoft almost certainly will announce Windows 7 Beta 1, as the company ramps up for the software's release, possibly as early as midyear."

And I am not supposed to laugh at you? I don't think so.

The fact is that the beta process for Snow Leopard has been ongoing for months, with a new beta release sent out to developers last week. Apple wisely don't pre-announce anything until it is ready for delivery.

Meanwhile, I am counting on Microsoft pulling their usual bonehead move by pre-announcing then not delivering. How many years late was Vista after Microsoft pre-announced its release date? Wasn't it close to FIVE YEARS?!

So please skip the ye olde doom and gloom Apple pre-dictions. Myth making is soooooo boring. There are better ways to waste our time.

And then you said: "Windows PCs cost less than Macs. People can argue Apple is better this than that all they want. It doesn't change that a reasonably good Windows notebook costs $600 to $700, while the aluminum MacBook starts at $1,299."

Myth making again I see. Ho hum. Thankfully someone above commented that you messed up your mathematics by only looking at shelf price, which is what every PC buying dumdum does. Let me set you straight with facts, versus myth:

Every professional report ever written comparing the price of a Macintosh to a comparably featured Windows PC has found that the Macintosh is ALWAYS CHEAPER. Why? Because every professional report includes two things most other people don't: Return on Investment (ROI) and Total Cost of Ownership (TCO). You can look them both up at Wikipedia.org. Windows PCs lose on both of these aspects of VALUE. They lose so badly as to make the typically higher shelf price of Macs well worth paying in order to gain on the remaining two further factors.

I personally would very much enjoy less expensive shelf priced Macs. Bring them on! But meanwhile, I can tell you that I am still running my 1993 Quadra 650, upgraded to a PPC, as my imaging workstation in my computer office. That means I've got a remarkable Return in Investment. The only added cost for owning the machine has been the PPC upgrade card, a new PRAM battery and a replacement hard drive. That means I got a remarkable Total Cost of Ownership. Good luck finding a Windows PC that holds up that long and provides value for that long. I also have three other Macs. One of them is my 9600 PPC, upgraded to a G3, which I use 24/7 as my Internet server to this day. I can't kill the thing. It happily runs Mac OS X Server 10.3.8 with never a crash. And so it goes.

That is why I no longer buy Windows PCs. The last one I owned was tipped into a dumpster over a decade ago. When I want Windows, I run it on my Intel Mac. And surprise! Vista typically runs faster on Intel Macs than it does on an IBM derived PC. Strange thing, value.

Snow Leopard is going to bring nothing to the table. That's not a criticism - I know Apple's engineers are having a hard time working around the unworkable mess of code that's been knocking around for ten years. But why announce something with no real new features?

It's not a case of "the Apple faithful will buy it anyway". It's more like "New Apple software will very quickly require the new operating system, and then when 3rd-party software requires the new operating system the Apple users *must* upgrade to keep their software current.". It's part of the Apple Upgrade Rollercoaster, and I think we'll see another class of Macintosh hardware obsoleted with Snow Leopard. Probably the PowerPC-based Macs.

(by the way, Macintosh hardware does not "run Windows faster than a PC". When Macintosh hardware is running Windows, it is identical to a PC!)

@Chris Lees

Please. When you said:

"I know Apple's engineers are having a hard time working around the unworkable mess of code that's been knocking around for ten years."

I knew you were a FUDster. Then when you talked about the "Apple Upgrade Rollercoaster", I knew you were a troll.

Earlier, Ken said it best when he said:

"Snow Leopard will run rings around Windows until Microsoft untangles their spaghetti."

Years ago Scott McNealy describe Windows as a hair ball, long before OS X existed. Hair ball and spaghetti are very descriptive of Windows. Why do you think Vista turned out the way it did? Apple has turned out six major releases of OS X since 2001, I don't consider that an unworkable mess. The changes that have gone on under the hood are nothing short of spectacular, because it hasn't adversely affected its' users. Do a little research on Open Directory, you'll see how far Apple has come to coexist with Active Directory.

Your upgrade roller coaster comment is blatantly false. New software may require the new OS, but far less software breaks with a new release than does in the Windows world. Vista is a prime example of that. The PowerPC will no longer be supported. It's time, that is a good business decision. Leopard will be just fine for those users.

Your last comment about hardware speed is true. But you failed to point out that the Mac will run Windows much better than that piece of crap you bought from Wal-Mart, or the low end models from Dell and HP.

If people are really concerned primarily about price and value, then why aren't we seeing double digit increases on Linux sales?

(Oh, we ARE seeing double digit increases in Linux installs. Nevermind....)

@Chuck Tryon:

So that's why Snow Leopard is in trouble!

I've read that 30% of the netbooks being sold are shipping with Linux. I haven't seen overall Linux installs that healthy. Net Applications doesn't really acknowledge Linux, and w3schools shows Linux as flat. Any sources/links you can share?

I bought a macbook over the holidays for $999. sure i could have bought a pc, but I wanted to be able to check out snow leopard when it is available, plus i want a computer that can run most if not all operating systems. I am a recent convert to mac, and I don't regret it even one bit. Sure I like to check out new operating systems, and i got to try out vista service pack 2 (ooops, i mean windows 7), but it still does not impress me as much as leopard on my intel macbook, which can run windows, linux or mac os. that is what I like, diversity on one machine.

I have finally given in to family pressure, and got our first Mac. After repeated problems with Apple support and two visits to our local Apple store for hour long sessions with their "Genius". I have learned two things. First Mac is not that different than PC in that once they have your money they really don't want to know you. Our new Mac has the highly touted Leopard OS on it, and even family members that are avid Mac fans HATE it. On one of my visits to the Genius, I was told "It is a Mac thing, you will get used to it." As a PC user since day one I am more accustomed to telling My computer what I want it to do, Rather than let it tell me what it will allow me to do. I am very Dissatisfied with Apple as a company, although I am not overly surprised by that. Understand I am a highly technical person, I am employed by Verizon. My job is to build and maintain SONET Rings. I deal with Data transmission and programming every day, so new technology doesn't scare me. I am just not accustomed to being thwarted by a tool that I use while trying to accomplish a task.
I have also learned (as I have always suspected), that Mac IS NOT the "out of the box" "user friendly" machine that it's television add say it is. It appears that they are striving to be like PC in all of the worst ways, not the Anti-PC system that the ads say.
In conclusion if you haven't bought a Mac yet, DON'T!! Windows 7 is on the way and could be the death nell of Mac, and you could be left with a really cool looking paper weight like me.

Some interesting comments over here. Long time windows user that switched to Linux back a few years ago. Have some experience with Mac OS X Tiger, and while I like my distro of Linux better, still, I find Tiger to be a vast improvement over anything MS has done.

My next computer will not be a Windows computer, it will be a Mac. And I will not even bother to run XP in bootcamp either, but Linux I will. The big plus that I see for buying a Mac, at least for me, is that I can legally run all three major OS.

Now, as to why so many people are buying Macs, and leaving Windows. I believe the root cause is the horrendous malware problem in Windows, and secondary, the failure of any value of Vista over XP. I could go on and mention the bloat, bad performance and the DRM of Vista, as other problems. Will Seven solve all these problems? I think not.

Steve Jobs says that Apple does not know how to make a $500 netbook. Which to me, means the price of Mac is not coming down when he made that statement. But I believe several things may happen. 1. The economy is tanking badly, and will force some price cuts. 2. Mac may introduce some cheaper laptops if its sale are impacted, but only if. They do know how, thats for sure, but look for more like $600 to $800. 3. After Windows Seven comes out, and nobody wants to buy a computer with it on, MS will be forced to cut the price of its OEM Seven.

hI ALL,
"All dat glitters are not gold".
Apple just blinks its output or its GUI,do anyone get a faster access to its GUI than Windows ???
No Never...
Apple makes things only around its look, Only dat,dats better for only its Ads or Presentation..nothin more....
But windows always gives u new things make eazy as much as possible in upgrades.....

hI ALL,
"All dat glitters are not gold".
Apple just blinks its output or its GUI,do anyone get a faster access to its GUI than Windows ???
No Never...
Apple makes things only around its look, Only dat,dats better for only its Ads or Presentation..nothin more....
But windows always gives u new things make eazy as much as possible in upgrades.....

This is just silly. Companies need to worry about getting people to buy computers PERIOD at this point. With out economy as it is, this whole article leaves me with an "oh look, the deck chairs have been rearranged on the Titanic" kind of feeling.

"Leopard is supported by Macs that are 6 years old. So what about MS's 18 months. So what about all your articles. You are a paid troller."

YOU must be kidding or your completely IDIOT!
6yo hardware are PPCs = they crawl under LEOSUX, you moron!

I love mac.
that's it.

I'm an outsider, preparing to enter into the market. I'm milking 98. The most impressive feature I will be swayed by is simplicity, stability , reliability. I don't won't to invest in recurring headaches. Snow leopard ,with no new "features", sounds fantastic to me.

"hI ALL,
"All dat glitters are not gold".
Apple just blinks its output or its GUI,do anyone get a faster access to its GUI than Windows ???
No Never...
Apple makes things only around its look, Only dat,dats better for only its Ads or Presentation..nothin more....
But windows always gives u new things make eazy as much as possible in upgrades....."

LMFAO - Poster child Windows user

In down times, "value" is not the model at all. If so, people would be running to Macs, spending the money, and hanging onto them for 6 years. No, from what you're describing, "cheap" is the model - at least in terms of upfront cost. Since comparisons are lacking between the upfront short-terms costs of Macs vs the long term hidden costs of Windows machines, we'll just have to leave it at that. And who ever suggested Windows 7 would be able to leverage existing hardware? Perhaps you could make that argument for those who already spent up to replace HW that became obsolete when Vista arrived, but for those who clung to what they had and kept XP, they will still be contemplating a new HW purchase, and they'll have to make sure everything still works. Vista left a bad taste in a lot of people's mouths, and bred uncertainty in the minds of everyone else.

I'm waiting for the intro of "Snow Leopard" to purchase a new Mac Pro with all the bells and whistles. Until then, my old Mac G5 works just fine.

On another note, it seems as though Apple has given up on their core business and whored themselves out to selling IPods and the like.

Look at the benchmarks for windows 7 - it's vista all over again - new wrap, same crap.

windows new features??? You mean making windows more "Mac like"? (windows - Now introducing features Mac had 5 years ago! wow)

My Macs have never had virus issues or driver incompatibilities. Video rendering is literally 100 times faster, Photo Shop at least 3 times faster ...

Running a small business I found the Mac also takes on tenth the effort to keep the workstation's patches up-to-date, less down time when patches fail, no virus problems, and I don't need to hire an IT tech because the users can handle the issues themselves.

lol, this was hard to read without wanting to commit random acts of violence. It's totally obvious this person has no idea what they're talking about.

For one thing, the reason why Mac computers are so expensive is BECAUSE THEY ARE COMPUTERS, not just an OS, its a FULL package, with a fast, stable, bug-free operating system pre-installed. Microsoft is a software-only company with crappy products which always have bugs needing to be "hotfixed", and don't try saying its because more people use PCs and more people write viruses for them, it's NOT true. Msoft's products had bugs from day 1.

It's obvious that the hardware you receive when purchasing a mac is top notch, and if you were to buy equal PC hardware you would be losing a very pretty penny without having an OS.

I could care less about who likes which OS, or company. The facts are truth, and will never lie.

Although personally I am starting to dislike apple's recent developing direction for new technologies, I would still never buy an OS such as Windows 7, because you know damn well, like every other windows release before it, it will have major security problems, and ah ha... it still has the registry, which will, without a doubt be an open door to those sick minds that like to play with it.

This "new" (ha!) Windows 7, is another rip off of past Mac OS innovations. The only Windows OS that was remotely original was XP, which was just a prettier version of 2000.

I'm going to go ahead and quote you here:

"Most people run Windows XP. Those who didn't switch to Macs should be ready for Windows 7, which has some, ah, Mac-like features. Compare Seven's new taskbar to the Mac OS X dock. Most anyone who bought a desktop or laptop in the last 18 months should be able to upgrade to Seven."

"Should" be ready for Windows 7? "Should" be able to upgrade? You realize, that every Mac owner is able to upgrade no matter what OS they previously had. You really need to do your research before you start bashing a company that has products that JUST WORK 100%.

Lets face it, Apple's consumer and IT support are far better than Microsoft's. Networking, programming, code writing will always be easier and less complicated on Mac and it's OS. Just look at Xcode, I dare you to tell me that building an application or source code is easy on Windows.

Graphics are another subject, and it's obvious I don't need to go into details about graphic performance while comparing the two OS'.

I've shared my two cents... Just promise you'll do your homework before you post something about Apple and Mac.