Apple must stop updating OS X annually!!!

Discussion in 'macOS' started by mavericks7913, Dec 22, 2015.


Do you prefer the current annual or pre-10.7 release cycles?

  1. Current

    129 vote(s)
  2. Pre-10.7

    145 vote(s)
  1. mavericks7913 macrumors 6502a

    May 17, 2014
    I really felt that OS X become less stable compare to Mavericks and Mountain lion. Let me ask this question: Why Apple updating OS X annually? It's too fast to update OS X every year that they don't fix bugs and issues within a year. My Mac crashed randomly and is unstable after Yosemite and El Capitan. If they can't fix these problems within a year, why don't they update OS every 2~3 yrs? This is a serious problem. I have Adobe programs that I'm using for my major and I really hate to update OS X annually but I have to since Adobe support new features in newer version. Apple forcing users and other developer a lot to update new version and this will make them tire and angry. Apps compatibility, developing apps for newer version, and etc. If Apple can't afford to build OS X perfectly, then they must stop this madness. OS X is seriously unstable than before. Im really seek of this terrible issue on OS X.
  2. derbladerunner, Dec 22, 2015
    Last edited: Dec 22, 2015

    derbladerunner macrumors 6502

    Sep 15, 2005
    I agree with you.

    I just wrote about the same topic/issue recently:

    Details and links to other complaints are in that post, I won't repeat everything here.

    I think the recent pressure to release OS X annually stems from annual iOS updates and the wish to somehow create "tandem" releases.

    But I don't see (now that we have basic integration between iOS and OS X) why OS X can't move back to larger updates every 2-3 years even if iOS is (still) updated every year.

    A slower release cycle would also remove pressure for third-party developers (having to test on a lot of OS X configurations) as well as large OS X installations (Edu, large business and gov installations using OS X).

    It's easy to become nostalgic and say "everything used to be better" but I honestly believe OS X took a stability nosedive after release 10.6.

    10.6 was rock-solid and I wish there were fewer but more stable updates since then.
  3. colourfastt macrumors 6502a


    Apr 7, 2009
    I'll add that in 10.5 and 10.6 updates were quick to download and install, and usually didn't require a reboot. Now all downloads are in the GB range, take 30++ minutes to download, 30+ minutes to install, and ALWAYS require rebooting.
  4. jasnw macrumors 6502a


    Nov 15, 2013
    Seattle Area (NOT! Microsoft)
    I'm running EL Capitan on a test system, Mavericks on my main system, and Snow Leopard on an older legacy system. Every time I go back to the SL system and use it for a while it's painful moving back to the new-and-improved recent releases. I had hopes for El Capitan after the disaster that was Yosemite, but as yet no joy. I'd love to see Apple take a solid year to iron out the numerous bugs, big and small, in El Cap rather than race to 10.12. What bugs? Just browse this and other Mac forums over the past couple of years.
  5. BrianBaughn macrumors 603


    Feb 13, 2011
    Baltimore, Maryland
    You're going to have to look hard to find someone that strongly disagrees with you. I've gotta say that I like several of the newest features but they do come at some expense.

    As an Apple Consultant, the updates don't cause as many problems for my clients as they do for me. Going from client to client I have to change thinking caps as I bounce around different OS versions.
  6. jasnw macrumors 6502a


    Nov 15, 2013
    Seattle Area (NOT! Microsoft)
    Personally, I would not care about an annual cycle if Apple just wouldn't break things that were working in past releases, or change things so you have to relearn how to do what you're using the computer for. I don't buy a computer in order to gaze in awe and admiration at how beautiful the GUI is, how sleek and stylish the system font is, or how thin the computer is. I buy it to use, and anything that gets in the way of using the computer is Not Good.
  7. campyguy macrumors 68040

    Mar 21, 2014
    Portland / Seattle
    OP, I do not agree with you, however, I have a contingency plan that every company I've ever worked for employs - wait until an OS is "certified".

    I like new, shiny stuff. I own Win PCs, Macs, iPhones, and iPads - for me and my small company. I use apps that range from iMovie to FCPX and Premier, drawing apps that range from freeware to AutoCAD/Fusion/CATIA, and project/scheduling apps like Project and Merlin.
    • Autodesk and some of our video software still haven't been certified for Win 10 or El Capitan, so my production machines are still on 10.8/9 or Win 8.1.
    • Merlin Project Server hasn't even been issued for the latest Mac OS, so we're still on Merlin Server.
    • MS is porting some of its underpinnings to its latest platform, so we're still on Exchange Server 2013.
    I have a developer account, but will let it die next year and sign up for the public beta process next year - the PB program didn't exist yet when I sent in my money. I never upgrade my Macs or PCs until the apps I/we use get approved/certified.

    Apple told all of their devs that they were changing the USB stack in their OS, so I held off - I need my mice and printers to work. MS told everybody in their Insider program about the changes from 8.1, and added that there would be significant changes near the end of 2015, so I held off.

    You're right. MS and Apple need to hold off a bit on pushing their OSes. But, you're not right. Users/consumers need to be responsible and read those TOS and app requirements and determine if their apps will work in those new, shiny OSes.

    I use an external TB SSD to install those Mac "betas" and a fast USB thumb drive for those Win "betas". And bide my time until my app devs bless those new OSes. Then I back up and take a plunge... :eek:
  8. Mikael H macrumors 6502a

    Sep 3, 2014

    And this.

    "Shiny and new" should always lose to "works" (although for the purposes of a private computer, that fight may be a close one). And if you mess things up despite being careful, backups are your friend.

    I actually ran into a problem with the El Cap upgrade where backups didn't help - some features of my iCloud account stopped working. There, on the other hand, the Apple Support was extremely helpful once I had deduced the problem couldn't lie on my side and actually gave them a call.
  9. cincygolfgrrl macrumors 6502


    Apr 2, 2012
    Somewhere In Time
    My first Mac came with Lion pre-installed. Not knowing any better, I thought it worked great compared to the WinXP machine it replaced. Since then I've updated to each new OS within a few days of release. My few complaints have been about features, rather than bugs. And actually, I adapt within a few days so even those have quit annoying me.

    I keep telling myself I'm not going to update, then Apple announces they're adding something I've been wishing for. El Cap came with split screen, so I was all over that one. If macOS Whateversnext has a feature I want I'll get that one too, otherwise I'll be happy to sit out a cycle.

    PS: my Adobe and MSOffice products are purchased, not subscriptions, so I don't need to update to keep up with them.
  10. Ebenezum macrumors 6502a

    Mar 31, 2015
    I agree with OP, Apple should release OS only when its ready instead of artificial timeline.

    I wrote about the same issue in another topic:

    One important point which hasn't been made yet is the cost of updating software, in my case hundreds of € yearly just to use latest OS. Previously I could wait much longer because OS was updated less frequently but I got fed up with the cost and the number of bugs in the latest Yosemite and El Capitan. I am planning to stay in Mavericks for several years because cost in € and time spend working around the bugs just isn't worth it anymore. I am not saying Mavericks doesn't have its bugs but compared to later OS its much more reliable!

    If Apple continues in the current release schedule I may have no other realistic option in the long term than to switch to Linux which was impossible idea some years ago...
  11. jasnw macrumors 6502a


    Nov 15, 2013
    Seattle Area (NOT! Microsoft)
    I think there were a lot of Linux users who switched over to OS X starting around Tiger, which is when I decided OS X was stable enough to change over. I was tired of spending large amounts of time keeping current with all the updates on Linux (apps and kernel) and the Apple mantra of "it just works" was attractive, and at the time largely true. I do a lot of programming, but that's not really my day job and I don't want to spend time either fighting or re-learning how to use the computer. Apple appears to now be driven by forces imported from the fashion world where you've got to have an annual release of new stuff for the anorexic models to show off on the runway or you're toast.

    Gee, thin and fashionable - where might these ideas be coming from??
  12. 32828870, Jul 10, 2016
    Last edited: Jul 10, 2016

    32828870 Suspended

    Jun 23, 2016
    New York and Berlin
    Note: This is regarding the end product and the changes in development made over the past decade that have played a role in releasing a more solid core OS, not about "Sierra" or using an OS still in beta.

    Been an OS X developer for well over a decade and I strongly dislike Apple's decision to move OS X to an annual release cycle to match iOS. Bertrand Serlet was lead engineer for OS X 10.4-10.6 and delivered the most solid OS X builds to date. Beta's were released ~bi-weekly and had to be downloaded and installed on a clean drive in order to test and debug the OS without third party interference over a 1 1/2 - 2 year period.

    Craig Federighi took over with 10.7 and OS X builds moved to an annual cycle with beta's (DP's) installed over DP's. Debugging and proper testing became a nightmare which often resulted in lesser quality releases. Stories from former OS X engineers should make most OS X users concerned. Third party developers should be handling that workload, Apple engineers should be focusing on the core OS.

    I'd gladly pay $129 for a solid release on my Mac's than rushed releases riddled with open bugs from three OS's ago. I have a new Mac Pro6,1 running Sierra and El Capitan and a 2012 classic Mac Pro running 10.6, interestingly enough Snow Leopard runs circles around any OS X I've had on my new Mac Pro (a 12-Core system vs. 6-Core).
  13. robE89 macrumors regular

    Oct 9, 2011
    You know...nobody forces anyone to install the beta version. It's easy now to blame apple for bugs and compare with older versions but we forget that in the past there wasn't icloud, continuity and other stuff. macOS we like it or not, became more complex, technical wise considering that they have to improve more many things now like security/privacy/etc. I'm not saying that they are perfect, i just think that we expect way to much from them year after year. To be honest i built a lot of hackintoshes and i'm using a macbook pro but didn't really ran into major bugs until now.

    Just my 2c.
  14. 32828870, Jul 10, 2016
    Last edited: Jul 10, 2016

    32828870 Suspended

    Jun 23, 2016
    New York and Berlin
    This isn't about beta's. My mention of macOS Sierra is due to the many more bugs and issues being reported to engineering (via connections with the company) as well as general online discussions.

    On topic, the question posed is whether the changes in how the core OS is developed have negatively impacted the end product. 10.7+ (~2009) development completely changed versus pre-10.7 which seemed to focus more on the OS with proper debugging.
  15. mikzn macrumors 65816


    Sep 2, 2013
    If we wait till they stamp out all the bugs we would have to wait "too long" to use a lot of new features and Apple might loose ground against Android, Windows and others.

    I like the fact the iOS and MacOS are advancing and moving along "in step" since many of the latest features are now cross platform ( phone, iPad, lap top) and also Windows, Drop Box, etc.
  16. 32828870 Suspended

    Jun 23, 2016
    New York and Berlin
    True. Yet I'd rather quality over features that I may or may not use. There are plenty of well acknowledged and open bugs since 10.8. The "WiFi" issues many have experienced are primarily due to the change(s) in Broadcom wireless and bluetooth chips. Pre-2012, Mac's had separate Bluetooth and Wireless chips. Now Mac's have been using Wireless ac + BTLE 4.x combination chips that have been acknowledged as producing undesired results. Many Mac Pro owners have experienced bluetooth interference when copying files via AFP, SMB, FTP locally or simply using their wireless network. Connecting a Cat-6 and disengaging the wireless connection seems to have helped but it's still very prominent. I've used the exact Broadcom chips in Hackintoshes without an issue as Broadcom has released updates along with minor tweaks to the hardware that do not require replacements, just shifting antennae cables.

    Why Apple hasn't fully acknowledged this issue with hardware and software remedies is disconcerting, but we have really cool emoji's and fun messages! ;)
  17. HKSA macrumors newbie


    Jul 10, 2016
    I agree. Seems like they're reverting to behaviour last witnessed around about time Steve Jobs was thrown out of Apple, when they were focussing on fonts and such things, instead of building good systems...
  18. leman macrumors G3

    Oct 14, 2008
    I haven't noticed any substantial difference in quality of OS X after it shifted to a yearly release. Every Mac model has had its hardware issues and every OS X has had it share of bugs. At any rate, my Apple experience is much better right now than pre-12, so I am definitely happy with what the company is doing.
  19. mikzn, Jul 10, 2016
    Last edited: Jul 10, 2016

    mikzn macrumors 65816


    Sep 2, 2013
    @ StarkerMann - good points and no arguments on the hardware issues - there should be more acknowledged remedies. but hardware issues won't change with software updates and you are correct there are many software issues too!

    That said, holding back progress on the new advantages that El Capitan offered and now Perhaps Sierra offers - because of some of the bugs that did not get fixed or perhaps "prioritized" properly does not make sense and is not progress - El Capitan was a wonderful upgrade and fixed a lot of stuff.

    @ HSKA - Apple was kind of founded on "fonts and such things" and made it's mark in the publishing industry - where this was very important factor - I am pretty sure Steve Jobs was not "Thrown out of Apple" for "messing around with fonts" he was probably a champion in this area.
  20. MysticCow macrumors 6502a

    May 27, 2013
    And Jobs isn't here to save them anymore.
  21. 32828870, Jul 10, 2016
    Last edited: Jul 11, 2016

    32828870 Suspended

    Jun 23, 2016
    New York and Berlin
    Excellent points. Everyone.

    HKSA, interesting you brought that up. Many have noticed Apple becoming fragmented again, heading towards a 90's John Scully era. The best thing Jobs did upon his return was creating the infamous "Four Quadrant product grid". Cutting products and focusing on "Consumer" and "Professional" markets with "Desktop" and "Portable" systems brought the company back to basics and improved their products while working on polishing new projects. Jobs had great idea's and believed that if the idea succeeds the profits will follow. Cook is a CEO, he is about numbers. Ive has taken over development and design, but he's resting on past success. Jobs was the visionary, Ive was the designer, Cook the CEO. Those three working with top engineers in the industry made Apple a success.

    Apple needs that focus again. It's reaching into area's not because of idea's but because of the markets. They're thinking like a CEO. Increase profit margins by using less expensive and powerful hardware with a premium price tag (I love my Mac Pro, but a $4-6k computer with 3-year old tech is unacceptable, especially 5400 RPM drives in desktop systems when better hardware isn't much more expensive). Jobs knew how to work an audience and half of Apple's success were the keynote's, WWDC, lines for new iPhones and products - it all created buzz and marketed itself.

    Where is Apple now?

    - Core Line's: Every core product line now has three variations.

    Mobile Products:
    - iPhones (4", 4.7", 5.5")
    - iPads (7.9" Mini, 9.7" Pro, 12" Pro)
    - MacBooks: 12" MacBook, 11" MacBook Air, 13" MacBook Air, 13" MacBook Pro, 13" and 15" MacBook Pro Retina

    Desktop Products:
    - Mac Mini
    - iMac's: 21.5", 21.5" 4K, 27" 5K
    - Mac Pro

    - The Apple Watch: Created specifically for Jobs as he was frustrated with the lack of direct health care, it was never intended to be brought to public.

    - Apple TV: Stalled or failed negotiations killed the coaxial and DVR production models. The "cable box" replacement needed another marketing angle, apps. Slightly improved hardware and a redesigned os (tvOS) with an App Store was already in the works but had to become the central marketing feature.

    - Apple Car: No comment.

    - Beats Acquisition: Biggest mistake. Apple needed the music labels Luke Wood and others could bring in for Apple's streaming service, but on the condition that "beats" became the primary audio label for Apple. Jobs would have found another way or not launched the streaming service at all. This was Cook's first mistake.

    - Software Engineering: Moving OS X to an annual release cycle and combining it with iOS developing under one price, $99/yr, was a marketing move (more developers = more apps = more products sold)

    Apple needs to take a step back, pull out of pushing into new markets so soon (Mickey Drexler did this with GAP in the 90's and it almost bankrupted a hugely successful corporation), and make your products and services better.
  22. Lolito macrumors 6502


    Mar 20, 2013
    absolutely agree. Problem is that pro users represent 3% of the business, and people that just want a laptop that has the apple logo on the lid to go to the coffee shop are 97% of the business.

    But still, I would rather have 2 year releases, if they are more decent.
  23. DoctorDoctor Suspended

    Jul 14, 2016
    So those of us that are not "Pro" users only use Apple products because of the "cool" Apple logo ? Really ? I can assure you that is not why I use Apple products. Matter of fact most of my Apple gadgets have covers that cover the logo. Please get over yourself.
    --- Post Merged, Jul 14, 2016 ---
    Where can I read more about the Apple Watch and what it was really intended for ? Thanks.
  24. Feenician, Jul 14, 2016
    Last edited: Jul 14, 2016

    Feenician macrumors 601


    Jun 13, 2016
    Steve Jobs as a God, Starbucks as the sole denizen of Mac user, Tim Cook as the new John Sculley. Could this thread possibly be any more a of a tired cliche bumped by mostly new registrants with literally nothing but negativity in their posting history? :rolleyes:
  25. maflynn Moderator


    Staff Member

    May 3, 2009
    I'm not a fan of the current cycle, and I think the prior releases illustrate a fundamental flaw in this approach. You cannot have the marketing department dictate when a major release is rolled out. I think we have that where we they now adhere to an accelerated pace for upgrades.

    I think overall, they see how successful iOS is with their annual update and decided its a good idea for the desktop.

    I'm not saying the cat releases were bug free, but I think the mentality of not releasing it until its ready is a better approach, then always releasing a major update every fall. Of course Apple is not doing anything different, Ubuntu does a 6 month release schedule, Windows is also on an annual update at this point. I think the state of the industry has mature to the point where it may make sense, but I stand by my assessment, that I'm not a fan of it.

Share This Page

151 December 22, 2015