OS-X-rated....

[Highmac]

George drew my attention to the followingGuardian letters (March 20) and suggested you might like to read the one carrying the head OS-X-rated. I haven't tried X yet, so I am making no comment whatsoever - simply share the writer's views with you. However, whatever the merits or otherwise of X, it would appear that Apple have not helped themselves PR-wise.

[taliesin]

There are fixes for all the issues raised in that letter, but the fellow has a point if he was wanting an OS that doesn't need fixing.
Perhaps this is the lighter end of what epimondas means when he says X is "stlll in beta".
The modem issue with the 10.2.4 upgrade was bad, and it was worse that it took Apple several days even to acknowledge it.
As for service, well, I've nothing to add to what I've said often - I'm just relieved that some people here report a decent response occasionally.
---
Pity the guy decided his next computer won't be a Mac, but I can see why he thinks Apple is partly to blame. Myself, I still reckon being a Mac user is almost synonymous with wanting to fiddle, learn and tweak...

[kelly]

Highmac. That's one of the silliest anti OS X articles I've seen.  

Silly comments. Silly complaints.

Wonder what kind of Engineer that was? Civil?

taliesin has had some problems with Europeon Apple Service.

Happens. No doubt.

But that is not a fair appraisal of OS X.

If you have the machine that can run it well.

It's well worth checking out.

Decide these things for yourself.