Analysts: Leopard forecast undervalued

Pretty much everyone i know wants this ASAP. time machine alone is worth 120 bucks.

It's going to be huge. Just wait and see.

Time Machine alone is worth more than 120 bucks, look at the cost of Retrospect, Time machine has all those capabilities, but is far easier to use.

Incremental backups is HUGE!!!

Retrospect for my old Mac OS X Servers was $1000.

I think Apple is dead on with this estimate! Why? Look at the guidance for the next quarter and think of all the folks such as myself who are not going to by the OS update rather use the $129.00 towards the purchase of a replacement machine. I don't by OS upgrades, I buy new machines with new features and warranty coverage. Think about it guys!

ditto. I'm wavering between new machine or upgrade. Despite being an apple fan, and needing an intel box, because I also do windows work...I have yet to upgrade to an intel based mac. I don't really want to keep upgrading this old g4 monster...so what to do...not sure yet. Problem is, apple doesn't sell a low cost tower anymore, and thats what I still want. I am not considering anything apple sells today...I won't move up to a $2500 system...absurdly expensive. I don't want an iMac with its underpowered graphics card, especially if this is doing double duty as my windows machine. I like laptops but...this isn't for my mobile needs...its for my sit down and work for 8 hours needs.

Sucks, because they seem to hate this popular segment in the pc world, of expandable towers... dunno what to do yet.

Sure there are a lot of new mac users that have crossed the great divide (Windows users). But there are a lot of people that don't know what an operating systems is. If you don't read up on this stuff like most people you are blissfully ignorant (like most windows users). Still there has been some publicity about Leopard and of course the Apple stores have it plastered all over the place so that will spark interest to those out of the loop.

What did you pay for your old G4? I don't think it can be all that much less than the Mac Pro. The iMac has a more powerful video card than 75% of the PCs on the market currently, and just because the MacBook Pro is a laptop, it doesn't stop you from plugging it into a monitor with a keyboard and mouse and using it like a desktop with 2 monitors. The Architecture firm I useed to work at did this and they were running CAD software that has more hardware requirements than anything I'm sure you are running. In fact they have gone to MacBook Pro as the primary machine to run their Windows based REVIT CAD software because no other Notebook on the market for under $3000 can run it nearly as well. I plug my MacBook Pro into a 30" Cinema display and use it as a desktop all the time.

roehlstation, that's nice for your architecture firm or anyone who wants to spend $3000 on a new computer (and another 2 grand for a 30" monitor).

But from what I gather from johnathan's comments, he's not looking to replace his G4 tower with something that costs $2500 (um, its what he said). He wants an expandable computer. Why? I don't know, maybe because he has one already and has realized the benefits of having such a machine (being that its upgradable, it has a much longer usable life then the iMacs or the like - which is very important being that you have to save up for 5 years just to afford a decent replacement)

As I've also complained about before, while Apple makes some nice computers, they have a LOT of gaping holes in their offerings. They offer no expandable computer for less then $2500. They offer no 15" laptop for less than $2000. I guess if you've got money to throw around, you don't care. But a lot of people do.

We're mac users. We're told we shouldn't settle for less then what we need/want (like Windows users so often do). Yet Apple doesn't give us what we need. But, then, Apple tends not to care too much about their users as much as they care about themselves.

I hope Leopard sells like crazy, but I won't be buying a boxed copy. Unlike Tiger, where I had a variety of Macs at home that were readily upgradeable, Leopard's requirements seem significantly higher relative to when Tiger was released. Heck, I've got three G4s at home, and only one is able to run Leopard, even though they're perfectly able to run Tiger. Tiger even runs fine on a G3! As near as I can figure it, all the extra core animation effects and USB2 are what's driving the 867Mhz G4 minimum requirement. But, I'm also big fan of user-upgrading. My first G4 tower only cost $1200 new and I've upgraded it significantly over time. I too see a huge hole in Apple's product line for the home-Mac hobbyist. I have no desire to spend $3000 on a new PowerMac tower, but I'll probably end up buying a 20" iMac for my wife soon. So that' when I'll get to try Leopard.

So while I picked up Puma, Jaguar, Panther, & Tiger on their first day of availability in the past, this one I'm passing on for now (though I'll definitely stop by my Local Apple store on the 26th for a t-shirt!). Leopard seems to have some fancy-animation additions: Stacks, Document-flow, Time Machine, etc. The only real upgrade I'm interested in actually using is Mail 3 and XCode 3. Almost everything else just seems like fancier frosting and not a better cake.

I think Apple is dead on as well. I rarely buy upgrades. For me, it rarely make sense unless I bought the computer not to long ago and do not plan on buying a new one anytime soon. This is because Leopard comes free with a new computer purchase. By buying the OS as a stand alone product, I am essentially taking five percent on to the cost of a computer purchase since I am paying for an OS with that computer purchase. Moreover, Leopard looks cool to me, but it really offers nothing I absolutely need in terms of features. After-all, I have been getting by fine for the last couple of years with Tiger. To benefit from Time machine, you need an external hard drive, or a Mac Pro.

I think Leopard will drive Mac sales for no other reasons that there are a lot of G3 and G4 computers out there that will not operate with the new OS. Mine included. I will buy a new computer in the next few months. Likely in January after the lines are updated.

Apple for the longest time up until the introduction of the G5 in its Pro Towers offered an entry level tower that ran for about $1599. This allowed people who wanted expandability an affordable option. Apple doesn't do this anymore.

Apple had a sale when I bought my G4 several years ago. I bought a dual G4 Power mid range Tower for $1599, which was the price of the entry level model at the time. It threw in a seventeen inch monitor to boot.

You write, "What did you pay for your old G4? I don't think it can be all that much less than the Mac Pro. The iMac has a more powerful video card than 75% of the PCs on the market currently, and just because the MacBook Pro is a laptop, it doesn't stop you from plugging it into a monitor with a keyboard and mouse and using it like a desktop with 2 monitors. The Architecture firm I useed to work at did this and they were running CAD software that has more hardware requirements than anything I'm sure you are running. In fact they have gone to MacBook Pro as the primary machine to run their Windows based REVIT CAD software because no other Notebook on the market for under $3000 can run it nearly as well. I plug my MacBook Pro into a 30" Cinema display and use it as a desktop all the time."