Re: SIX version of Vista
- From: C Lund <clund@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 10:30:52 +0100
In article <PbLMf.10996$Pv1.2685@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
"zara" <zspook@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Oh, I get it. Add a patch, add a number after the decimal, add a cats name,
and Poof- a whole new OS. You do pay for that don't you?
You get a bit more than just a number and a new cat on the box.
More importantly - you don't have to do every upgrade! I'm currently
at 10.3.x. The only reason I'll get Tiger is because it'll come
installed on the Mac I buy later this year. I'll probably skip 10.5.x.
OS X upgrades are optional. If the version of OS X I'm currently
running runs the software I want it to run, then there's no point in
upgrading (unless the upgrade has features I want).
--
C Lund, www.notam02.no/~clund
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: SIX version of Vista
- From: zara
- Re: SIX version of Vista
- References:
- SIX version of Vista
- From: Tom Bates
- Re: SIX version of Vista
- From: zara
- Re: SIX version of Vista
- From: Timberwoof
- Re: SIX version of Vista
- From: zara
- SIX version of Vista
- Prev by Date: Re: Vista - stillborn?
- Next by Date: Re: SIX version of Vista
- Previous by thread: Re: SIX version of Vista
- Next by thread: Re: SIX version of Vista
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading