Snow Leopard, Windows 7 and Netbooks
September 2, 2009
by Walter S. Mossberg
Am I correct that my iMac G5 can’t use Apple’s new Snow Leopard operating system? And, if so, why isn’t this just as bad as Microsoft’s making it hard for Windows XP users to upgrade to its new Windows 7 operating system?
Yes, you are correct. Snow Leopard is the first Apple OS version that runs only on Intel-powered Macs, and your iMac runs on the G5 processor, which isn’t an Intel chip.
As for the comparison with Microsoft’s policy: In one way, Apple’s approach is much worse. It is totally cutting off some of its user base from the new OS, including some folks with machines as little as 3 years old. Microsoft isn’t making it impossible for XP owners to move to Windows 7— it’s merely making it so painful, tedious and complicated to upgrade that many non-techies who want Windows 7 may give up and feel compelled to buy new PCs. On the other hand, Apple’s policy affects a smaller proportion of its customers. Only about 20% of its users still use older, non-Intel-based Macs. By contrast, Microsoft’s policy affects a much greater percentage of Windows users, since, despite its advanced age, Windows XP is still the most commonly used version of its OS.
A few years ago Microsoft used a code name of Longhorn for the operating system which ultimately was released as “Vista.” Will Windows 7 have a real name upon release?
The real name of Windows 7 is: Windows 7. It’s not a temporary code name, like “Longhorn” was. The product will be officially called Windows 7 when it comes out on Oct. 22.
Is it possible to connect a netbook directly to a larger PC to transfer data? The data I am interested in would be Word documents, Excel files, a limited number of photos and music files, and other personal files.
While I haven’t tested it, I assume that, since a netbook is just a small, cheap, standard Windows laptop, you could use Microsoft’s built-in file-transfer utilities to accomplish this, provided you use the right cable. In Windows XP, the operating system on most netbooks and most other PCs in use, this is called the Files and Settings Transfer Wizard. In Vista, and the forthcoming Windows 7, it’s called Windows Easy Transfer.
You can find Mossberg’s Mailbox, and my other columns, online for free at the All Things Digital Web site, http://walt.allthingsd.com.
Comments
APPL should offer a “cash for clunkers” for their non-intel computers.
Posted by greg wong at September 3rd, 2009 at 10:14 am” merely making it so painful, tedious and complicated to upgrade” Horse hockey!
Doing what amounts to a clean install of Windows 7 is nothing of the sort, as long as one backs up documents, etc, first. Reinstalling programs just is not that hard. Set aside an evening, get a beer, and get to it.
If one runs into problems, it will likely be because the hardware too old to consider an upgrade at all.
At least it is possible for XP users to upgrade, whereas it is not at all possible for that 20% of Mac users. And considering that a new Mac costs much more than a new PC, which group is the real loser?
Posted by David Prozzo at September 3rd, 2009 at 1:14 pm> Doing what amounts to a clean
> install of Windows 7 is
> [not painful, tedious and complicated]
You may not think so, but it’s not just about you. There are about 500 million XP machines that need upgrading. Most of those will require I-T consultant hours because there is no one-click in-place upgrade installer for XP to 7.
> Set aside an evening,
> get a beer, and get to it.
Let’s say by “evening” you mean 4 hours of work. For 500 million machines, that means over 200,000 man-years, roughly 3000 human lifetimes. Because there is no one-click in-place upgrade installer for XP to 7.
The last I-T consultant I hired cost $90 per hour, and that was a few years ago, but even at that rate, that is a $360 surcharge on upgrading to Windows 7. $360 per machine across 500 million machines is $180,000,000,000 dollars. Isn’t that enough money to buy Microsoft?
Also, when you add $360 to the $200 cost of Windows 7, you get almost enough money to buy a $599 Mac mini with Core 2 Duo, NVIDIA graphics, Snow Leopard, and iLife, and Apple will move your XP files onto it for free. So the cost to go from XP to 7 on the same machine is the same as going from XP to a new Mac.
There are PC virtualizers on the Mac that will import your whole functioning XP and run it on your Mac. Why doesn’t Windows 7 at least do this with XP Mode? Then after an upgrade you would have a functioning Windows 7 and functioning XP. At the turn of the century, when you installed Mac OS X onto a Mac OS 9 system, you got Mac OS X with 9 running in a box. The same 9 you were already using, with all the same apps and settings. If there are too many changes to NT 6.1 (Windows 7) that you can’t upgrade in-place from NT 5.1 (XP) then they should virtualize the old XP. They build the virtualizer in, they just didn’t complete the circle.
> At least it is possible for XP users to
> upgrade, whereas it is not at all
> possible for that 20% of Mac users.
> And considering that a new Mac costs
> much more than a new PC, which group
> is the real loser?
The real losers are people who bought an XP system during the past year or 2 and cannot upgrade it in-place to Windows 7. They have no upgrade path for a product they only just bought and which is almost a decade old.
And the whole Windows platform loses, because 80% are using XP right now, and those machines are all dead-ends. You have to switch to Mac, Ubuntu, or Vista/7. You can’t upgrade.
On the Mac side it is very different.
In the first place, there is a version of Snow Leopard that is optimized for old PowerPC Macs: it’s called “Leopard”. The big feature in Snow Leopard is “optimized for Intel Macs” but PowerPC users have already had that feature for years. Mac OS has been on PowerPC since 1996. You don’t need to buy a new OS to get “optimized for PowerPC.” PowerPC Mac owners already have 64-bit (2003), they already have multicore (2002), they already have the same UI from Snow Leopard in Leopard. So PowerPC users are not missing out on all the Intel-optimized stuff in Snow Leopard.
Secondly, all PowerPC Macs are at least 3 years old, and most are over 4 years old. They are unlikely to be updated even if Snow Leopard had new features for them.
Third, only 20% of Mac users are running PowerPC, a small minority of the platform. It’s not 80% like XP users.
Finally, once the PowerPC users do decide to purchase a new Intel Mac, their upgrade path is very easy. They connect the new Mac to the old Mac via Ethernet or FireWire or Wi-Fi, then they run Migration Assistant and the new Mac will automatically import the user’s data from the old Mac. Their PowerPC software will even run on the new Intel Mac thanks to the fact that Snow Leopard has a transparent PowerPC emulator built in.
So I think on the whole you are dramatically understating the problems caused by lack of upgrade path on Windows, and dramatically overstating them for Macs. And you’re thinking of the problem as involving just your one machine and you’re not willing to consider the cost of your time, when it involves a huge number of machines.
In a year or so, it will be interesting to compare the results of the upgrades and see how many Windows machines are running 7 and how many Macs are running Snow Leopard. If past is prologue you will find 75% of Intel Macs running Snow Leopard and 20% of PC’s running Windows 7.
Posted by Fred Hamranhansenhansen at September 4th, 2009 at 7:32 pmWe should all stop behaving as if Windows and Mac were some zero-sum game in which the good and bad of each is measurable only in relation to the other. The marketing departments of the two companies are trying to brainwash us into thinking that this rivalry is what matters to the consumer.
While it would have been nice to have easy upgrades from XP, and any upgrades on non-Intel Macs, there’s no sense in which these things are “owed” to us.
People with old Macs and XP were presumably happy before, and their machines aren’t going to work any less well just because something better has come along, at least not for several more years when application support begins to be withdrawn. If I were to complain to any manufacturer, I would start with Maytag, Acura, and Tivo. All now have better products than mine available, and none have offered me an upgrade at any price.
Posted by Charlie Brenner at September 5th, 2009 at 11:24 am@ Greg: “APPL should offer a “cash for clunkers” for their non-intel computers.”
If by “clunkers” you mean: “Apple’s 2007-vintage Leopard, which I regard as the best computer operating system out there, and markedly superior to its main rival, Microsoft’s Windows Vista.” – from Walt’s review of Snow Leopard.
So those poor non-Intel Apple owners are stuck using the “best consumer operating system out there”.
Leopard is just as good as it was a week ago. That hasn’t changed.
Snow Leopard provides some tweaks which your non-Intel computer is not capable of using- that’s all. Leopard continues to be updated and tweaked as usual.
XP, on the other hand, is a 5-6 year old operating system. To think Microsoft was able to charge buyers of new computers, a premium (!) to “upgrade” from Vista to a 6 year old operating system that does what it says it will do. Wow.
Only in Windows la-la land.
“Doing what amounts to a clean install of Windows 7 is nothing of the sort, as long as one backs up documents, etc, first. Reinstalling programs just is not that hard. Set aside an evening, get a beer, and get to it.”
Yup, tell that to your Mom- or Gramps.
Posted by Dave Shepard at September 6th, 2009 at 11:20 amMost upgrades will need an IT consultant……absurd. An ridiculous hyperbole offered to try to win an argument.
Besides, you’re confusing oranges and tangerines anyway. Upgrading XP to Windows 7 vs upgrading XP to Windows 7 on an OLD machine.
About six years ago I built an XP machine for my father. There is no way I would want to try to upgrade that computer, even though it might be *possible*. I doubt if the motherboard mfg even has modern drivers. It had minimal RAM (by today’s standards) as well. On OLD hardware, leave well enough alone.
At some point one has to abandon old hardware and pay the price for a new machine to obtain the lastest OS. Sound familiar…20% of Mac owners.
For someone who bought a machine say, 2-3 years ago, particularly if it was sold with Vista but the purchaser decided they wanted XP, doing a clean install of Windows 7 would be cake. Windows 7 would likely recognize all the hardware instantly and contain all the needed drivers.
He/she would have to reinstall programs, sure, but why would that be a challenge? He has already done it once, on XP, so he knows what to do.
Posted by David Prozzo at September 7th, 2009 at 6:32 am