John, some of these points make sense and are well taken, I have to point out however that in a way the validate my larger theme here, that lion implemented a lot of very dubious "features" that have been reverted, or rather have come as close as apple's ego will allow a revert, which is to offer an option for the a different way to do things. Users have been asked to pay again for these ui fixes. Some users, myself included, cannot run ml at all in several of their macs because apple is obsoleting devices that they don't have to obsolete.
Agreed, this is disappointing, but as I mentioned in another thread, I think overall it was better to release Lion, as it was, incomplete, than to have waited for the more refined and polished Mountain Lion. At the end of the day, 50$ is a good bargain for the combo. As for the hardware being obsolete, that would have applied anyway if they only released one version of Lion this year, so again it's a bonus to have release Lion and Mountain Lion separately. Some people thought Lion a nice upgrade from Snow Leopard.
I wish I could have snow leopard with a few of lion's good features, whatever these are, and nothing comes immediately to mind, well icloud instead of the defunct mm I had in sl, maybe the new filevault, there could be a couple more I am missing... and have a faster more reliable system.
Right, and that's fine from the consumer's point of view, but it isn't a realistic expectation of a for-profit company. Could they offer more for free? Certainly. Is it a big deal that they do not, when they price their OS so cheaply? I don't think so.
At the stage apple has put me in I am arguably paying on some macs for bug fixes and enhancements (wiki definition for a service pack), on an os update that again falls miserably short of doing any real backbone work (kernel is one behind ios) or adding any new features.
Well this is very debatable. All the new iCloud integration, Notes, Reminders, Messages, Notification Center, that's all very nice stuff, for a significant portion of us. PowerNap? Brilliant. Airplay Mirroring, unprecedented. Retina displays and their scaling operations, that's some deep backbone stuff right there. Yes they released it for Lion, but that was a provisional release. We all know Lion wasn't truly capable of handling the HiDPI mode. It's really designed with Mountain Lion in mind. Again, that might not be your cup of tea, but even Andantech thinks it took some very ingenious work to get the OS to be able to handle it as well as it does. Dictation? Very nice. Should all this have been part of Lion? Yes, but then there is no way Lion would have released 2 years after Snow Leopard. So again we're back to my first point, the new release cycle is much more desirable. Many will claim each one is simply a service pack, and in some sense that's right, but when you start to look at the progression over the typical development cycles, you'll notice a heck of a lot is happening.
We 've come to the extent where pinch to zoom in text edit, is included as a new feature, along with a notes app, chinese support (who the eff cares anyway if you are not chinese? Are the going to be touting every language they add from now on as an os feature) etc etc. in a list on apple's site that you read through in a few secs, and you go ho hum, nothing there pretty much.
To limit ML to simply that is to miss the total-package and it's experience. Don't try and look at this piece-meal, i.e. how much more does this give over Lion. Ask yourself, how much more can I do now than I could 3 years ago?
All that doesn't really make me a happy camper, all the more so, when I see redmond has put a lot of effort in core work in their os to make it even faster than windows 7.
Oh the irony! People are deriding OS X for becoming more iOSified, and yet they compare it to Windows 8 that is being designed for PC+ computing, where according to Microsoft's most recent claims is the stage of computing where tablets and computers have fused. Apple's public claims? Let's keep these separate but allow them to influence each other.
I just feel that the world's most advanced os is currently a joke, with obj. c, an archaic kernel, an old file system, and a bunch of slap on features from ios. It keeps some of it's former glory in some prior ui and automation choices, but it's not getting any better. On the other hand the hardware apple uses is getting insanely better all the time. But what about the software?
It's on a yearly release cycle. Who's to say they aren't going to employ a tick-tock, tick-tick-tock model where you get the deep level revisions you are looking for down the line? ML was designed in one year. For the changes you are seeking, I'd think a more reasonable time frame would be for next summer or the one following. Honestly, ML, even if archaic in some places, is still a very performing environment.
That's why I said $50 isn't cheap, and a bilion and a half returns to apple (just by half the user base upgrading, surely more will) are simply not warranted for their efforts, imho. I went as far as to say $0 would have been a better price here (aren't ios updates free anyway?). I take that back, $20 for both lions would have been a fair price, provided lion was fast and bug free, which of course it wasn't.
50$ isn't cheap, and they make a truckload of money. But you are missing the point here. How much is Microsoft charging, and what do their returns look like? Yet when you applaud them, you don't mention that, why? That strikes me as somewhat inconsistent.
All that doesn't really make a happy camper, you know.
I know, and I'm trying to show sympathy where I think it is warranted. I find this conversation interesting, so hopefully you won't take my replies as an attempt to sell you on ML and Apple's direction. I'm just trying to share my perspective so that we may mutually influence each other, and to ask for further explanation where I'm not sure I understand the criticism, which is also why I explain how I see the issue.
Next time apple release a software, fast fire release cycles notwithstanding, I 'd rather they charged me $100 instead and gave me something that really was worthwhile, hell I wouldn't have a problem paying $200 if the os warranted it. But I do have a problem paying an extra $20 on bug fixes and enchancements and damn twitter, I do have a problem that half of my macs are stuck in lion cause apple said so. 🙂
Fair enough, but surely you realize there are tons of people like me who are very happy with ML since it meets our needs. We aren't fully informed and don't really care about the backbone and kernel tasks. We don't care about memory management and file structures. All I care about is this: Does this computer help me effectively produce my work? Do I enjoy working with this machine? Is it reliable? Is it fast? And so far, if I answer honestly, all those needs are more than met. The fact that this release integrates all my devices to seamlessly work together is phenomenal. I didn't buy those devices to be toys, but because they actually enhanced my work environment, so I rather have an update, sooner rather than later, that makes everything work together rather than wait for the deeper changes. 20$ sounds like the right price for giving me that extra facility.