Early 2013 base model 27" iMac. I would not call it slow or unstable. But it is slower and less stable than when it was running ML, for sure. I probably reboot it for stability reasons every couple weeks. Usually RAM shortages (only 8Gb). ML would run solid for months.
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.
OS X Mavericks Adoption Pushing Toward 50%
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Cause Snow Leopard is the best OS ever made by Apple, so their users choose not to upgrade.
Regarding Lion and Mountain Lion, they have no reason not to upgrade.
The problem is this OS doesn't seem to be receiving updates anymore, and many newer applications aren't supported. And you can't use Safari there for security reasons.
That's kind of the point of this thread, about the cost of upgrading not being worth it. Mavericks might be a free product from Apple, but your suggestion, apparently required in order for this free product to work correctly, actually costs over $200 in lost productivity. And that's being optimistic as well as assuming I can restore from a Time Machine backup after the clean install; or does that defeat the purpose of a clean install?
If you mean literally install everything from scratch, that has a real world cost of many hundreds of dollars in lost time for a typical professional. And for what? Because Apple won't support older OSes with security updates? I must pay $200+ for no gain? Just a maintenance fee? At least with Microsoft, if you're on a solid OS, you can stay on it for 10 years. I can stomach the upgrade cost every 10 years. But annually? That's just not sensible.
Those asking why Lion users haven't upgraded - it may have something to do with hardware. I've recently bought a new Mac Pro (the one that looks like Darth Vader's barnet) and, of course, that's got Mavericks but my old machine was a 2006 Mac Pro 1,1 which wouldn't run anything more recent than Lion. I'm sure there are plenty of other people out there who would like to move to a more up to date version of OS X if only their hardware supported it.
Not a surprise, Windows XP & 7 were Microsoft's best OS'es ever. Just like SL for Apple.
Seems low, especially given how long Mavericks has been available and the fact it's free. Could it be possible that only 40% of Macs in use can run Mavericks? According to Apple's requirements.
That, or they're tired of the frantic upgrade pace Apple imposed. Or more realistically they use more mobile devices than real computers.
Not sure which planet you live on, but the planet I live on has Ubuntu every 6 months, iOS and Android every year, and Windows every year since 2012. OS X is not unique in this regard.
Right Ubuntu has a new version every 6 months, and I also find this too fast to properly iron out bugs. However, they also have a LTS version. It's not because the others do it that it doesn't impact users' workflow. Many have disliked Lion and following versions, and still consider Snow Leopard to be the best version of OS X ever made, i.e. before switching to a fast development cycle, complete with growing pains.
Windows seems unpredictable. While XP was released very soon after 2000 while not bringing significant bug correction or anything new for that matter, XP lasted almost 10 years before moving on to the much-hated Vista, then Windows 7, that was stable, and replaced for no apparent reason by the disliked Windows 8.
Short development cycles took a toll on Firefox's quality and compatibility, for example. So no, OS X is not unique in this regard.
Blech, Jaguar? Panther? :/
If you have a G3 or G4, you should be running Tiger.
----------
Hehe, it looks like users are moving from WinXP ..... to Win 7
----------
Erm... I'd argue Mac OS 8.6 and Tiger. But okay..
Hehe, it looks like users are moving from WinXP ..... to Win 7
Lol, I didn't even notice that. I didn't know it was possible for an old OS to rise in install base, haha.
A lot of people don't even know that they can update, or even what an OS is. My cousins on the West Coast were running Snow Leopard until I visited and was horrified. I had to reset their Gmail passwords for them. "iCloud, what the hell does that do?"
Stuck on OS X 10.7.5
Unfortunately, as much as I really want to run Mavericks, I'm running a very capable 8 core MacPro from 2008 that is frozen at 10.7.5. It has a motherboard that has some 32-bit issue and does not allow us to upgrade further. Fortunately it runs amazingly fast for all Adobe products and 3D work that I do. Rendering slows it down a touch, but I send work to a render farm for clients so that's not an issue.
It also runs Windows 8 in bootcamp just fine.
Wish I could afford a new MacPro, but it's not in the cards right now.
Unfortunately, as much as I really want to run Mavericks, I'm running a very capable 8 core MacPro from 2008 that is frozen at 10.7.5. It has a motherboard that has some 32-bit issue and does not allow us to upgrade further. Fortunately it runs amazingly fast for all Adobe products and 3D work that I do. Rendering slows it down a touch, but I send work to a render farm for clients so that's not an issue.
It also runs Windows 8 in bootcamp just fine.
Wish I could afford a new MacPro, but it's not in the cards right now.
The price is out of the window.... The use of the word "Free" means nothing if the OS has bugs i the early stages, and or users don't like features and/or the idea that they must turn these off for something that clearly they hate on a desktop class, or the way Apple has made more and more iOS features available than Mountain Lion.
As any OS grows, matures, updates come out, of course more and more people will use it... You could have charged $20 and it wouldn't have made a slight of difference...
It's the way things always have been..
As any OS grows, matures, updates come out, of course more and more people will use it... You could have charged $20 and it wouldn't have made a slight of difference...
It's the way things always have been..
I'm still using 10.7 on my work mac -why? well I simply can't be arsed to play catchup every 5 minutes. The machine currently does what I need it to without crashing and I see no reason to upgrade.
Not everyone wants to throw out their 5 year old Mac and buy a new one when their current machine runs what they need and gives decent performance.
My Mac Pro 2,1 can handle Mavericks with out a problem, but Apple only officially supports Mavericks on it. Why? So I can spend $$$$$ on a new machine when the old one is faster and better than a MBP Mid 2010 that supports Mavericks.
I think you all misunderstood what I was saying.
My surprise was about how 10.6 and 10.7 were both at exactly 18%.
The difference between Leopard and Snow Leopard is 3-18. The difference between Lion and Mountain Lion is 18-21. I'm just surprised that those ratios aren't a little bit closer to each other.
Every single reason you guys are all posting explains why there's some percentage, but not why they're identical. I still find it surprising.
Well, isn't that intriguing! Everything I had read--or mis-read-- indicated it was Mavericks that had stopped the UBS synching and was requiring wi-fi.
Uh-oh! Just remembered that I upgraded iTunes the other day. Yep, it's now the latest version 11.1.5 (came out in February). Let me test your statement.
I entered an event in my iPhone and one on my calendar. Just synched via USB cable. Now checking on the calendars on both.
Guess what? Even before I could finish checking and type up my reply, an alert popped up on my Mac from the event I had entered on my iPhone. When I looked at the calendars on both, they each had the other's new event.
So, you are WRONG!! The events synched both ways--via USB cable.
So, indeed, it must be Mavericks that is requiring the wi-fi synching!
Hope you can clarify...
I'm not sure these drivers are developed by Apple instead of the OEM.
Once upon a time, ATI/AMD tried to shoehorn new video cards by dropping official Windows 7 support (they just stopped at a buggy beta version) for everything older than ~2 years.