Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Seeds OS X Mavericks 10.9.2 Build 13C62 to Developers
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Time for an executive decision and remove him from OS X engineering. Nothing against him, I'm sure he's a brilliant programmer, but he's been in charge of 3 OS X releases (Bertrand officially left in '09, Federighi helmed 10.7 but wasn't officially placed on Apple's board until '11), about average for an Apple's SVP of OS X engineering. Since OS X moved to an annual release cycle to mirror iOS (compared to 1 ½ - 2 years previously), aspects seem [more] half baked, rushed and unpolished. It shouldn't take .1-.2 updates to debug core components when 6-12 months for more 10.X development would make more sense. We'll be ready for 10.10 soon! That's ridiculous.
Time to give someone else a chance (or coax back Serlet) and return to an OS X development cycle that makes more sense than rushed annual releases.
Last edited:
Google "Mavericks 100% kernel task" and peruse any of the hundreds of threads on the subject.
I keep on having issues with both my old version of Quicktime Pro V7 and the latest version of Quicktime Player. Prior to Mavericks, I could play .MOV and other file types. Now it seems all it can play is .mp4 format.
Keep getting error message to look for 3rd party extensions (which I don't like to use).
Keep getting error message to look for 3rd party extensions (which I don't like to use).
Based on the iOS 7 sub forum it seems a lot of the bugs in iOS 7 have been fixed.
For me is also a Software update with release notes, in spanish.
So public release around the corner.
Good Luck
Attachments
You seem to think that it was Craig's initiative to push for annual releases. That kind of thing would have to be a CEO decision imho or at least a consensus decision. I have nothing against Craig. He's an enthusiastic presenter and OS X releases have not suffered under his rule. And even though pushing for annual releases means more buggy .0 releases, it also means faster feature implementations.
Last edited:
I don't know if Mr. Federighi should go. He actually is a pretty good presenter, I do think you right on this yearly update stuff though. Also, scott forstall left which I think was kinda dumb. I mean he had talent at least as a presenter and getting rid of him has given us an industrial guy on software. Also just not smart.
Do you really think they have someone more competent around or will be able to coax back a man as busy as Serlet? Serlet wasn't fired or forced out, he left on his own accord to pursue things he considered more interesting (apparently work on cloud computing) and is currently not only managing his own startup, also on the board of Parallels Inc. Versions helmed by him weren't prefect ether (specially 10.5, which I personally like to call Apple's Vista) and I suspect you're just being blinded by nostalgia thinking 10.7-9 are considerably buggier than what came before or weren't around reading people's comments with all the issues they had with 10.5.
As for the yearly release cycle, I get the feeling you're not really seeing the forest for the trees as you can't directly compare one version they've worked on for a year with another version they've worked on for two. Knowing that there's a number of things I'd like fixed (chief among them how badly OSX lags behind development in OpenGL), but are too big for ".1"-updates, I actually prefer a yearly release cycle rather than once every two years.
My favorite versions of OSX have been the ones where they've just stopped and focused on under-the-bonnet work like 10.6 and 10.9. I personally think every version of OSX since 10.5 has been fairly weak in the "new features" department, so you can't really blame Federighi for it on his own.
Also, even thou Federighi may have officially helmed 10.7, big software projects like major versions of an OS are often planned years ahead, meaning that while Federighi may have lead development, Serlet was in charge when the actually planning of the project was done.
I'd like to see them come out with a version that "Removes 200 Useless Things." Shouldn't entropy be making the programs get smaller?
I never insinuated Federighi was incompetent. In fact, I clearly stated he's most likely brilliant. Take a breath, relax. Now, you are jumping to grand conclusions and assumptions. For the sake of the thread, I'll simply address one minor flaw. The annual release cycle has negatively impacted development. Before, we would receive/download dmg's that required burning and a clean install, sometimes weekly. The time would vary, but most often major OS X 10.X releases spent more than a year for development, and very rarely did 10.X.x releases spend as much time in development as they seem to be since the move to quicker releases. The thinking many in development seem to share is this could be avoided by spending the time in "addressing" major bugs BEFORE 10.X release and not after as long time OS X developers and users have noticed this "trend". That's seeing the forest from well above the trees.
Secondly, Serlet was not in charge during 10.7 development. In 2009, he had already transitioned out of OS X and Apple development. His departure was announced that year, but Federighi was already working and most likely receiving some assistance to ease his transition into his new position. However, he was already with Apple well into 2009 and working out 10.7 (he simply wasn't "officially" placed on Apple's online board as SVP of OS X Engineering until 2011, which puzzled some). I've been over this with others as it has been a common misconception for a few, but make no qualms about it, Serlet was out the door and moving on well before.
My point was that Apple seemed to rotate SVP of OS X engineering to keep a fresh perspective on development. Sometimes in programming it is easy to have "tunnel vision" and progress may falter ("forest from the tress). That is it.
No harm, no need for fowl.
Last edited:
I agree with you. However, there can be another reason: poor foundation. Perhaps, Lion served as a poor foundation for all the OSs after. ML and Mavericks are only an improvement (with some more features) on Lion. You know what they say about fixing something that's fundamentally broken to the core, it can't be. During these developers betas, even though they are taking their time, it seems that they are trying to plug leaking holes while new ones appear as a consequence. So it could be that the core of Lion was poorly made and they've been just trying workarounds to fix that. Workarounds, that cause other problems to appear as a consequence.
What hardware are you on if you don't mind me asking? I've been running mavericks since the betas on multiple machines without issue (except for one of the beta releases and vpn issues on server).
All I'm saying is it's nice to see so many iterations before a final release. Hope they squash your bug this time and that 10.9.2 will be solid upon final release.
----------
Oh wow! They finally fixed the icons?!
/joking sorry don't hit me!
Fluency. In terms of loading speeds or usability it doesn't make a single bit difference, but to the feel and the illusion of things loading smoother, a stuttery animation doesn't help.
Works for "Snow Leopard 100% kernel task", "Lion 100% kernel task", and "Mountain Lion 100% kernel task" as well.
tl;dr The kernel does a lot of things.
