toggle

AAPL Stock: 493.42 ( + 0.25 )

MacNN News

Apple to slow the pace of Mac OS X releases

updated 04:45 pm EDT, Tue May 18, 2004

Mac OS X releases to slow

Apple says it plans to continue rapidly bringing out new versions of Mac OS X, but it won't continue at quite the pace it's maintained in recent years, according to CNET News.com: "Since rolling out the first version Mac OS X in 2001, Apple has released three updates, and it plans to show off a new version of the operating system, code-named Tiger, at its worldwide developer conference next month. However, during a talk at the SIIA Enterprise Software Summit 2004 here, Apple Chief Software Technology Officer Avie Tevanian said, ' a little bit...because that's not a sustainable rate. But you'll still see us go really fast.'"

by MacNN Staff

(17)

TAGS :

Apple

Share the Article

Facebook Twitter Delious Slash Dot Digg

toggle

Comments

Eriamjh
Addicted to MacNN

Joined: Oct 2001

0

05/18, 04:56pm | report spam | close Reply |
Faster than Longhorn...

'nuff said.

MacnTX
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Apr 2004

0

05/18, 05:05pm | report spam | close Reply |
No Biggie

Maybe this will quiet down the critics who didn't want to pay $129 each year anyway. As long as Apple continues with the innovation and quality it doesn't matter if the pace of new OS upgrades slows somewhat, they're still light years ahead of M$.

AsgardTex
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

0

05/18, 05:09pm | report spam | close Reply |
Makes Sense

Really, it wasn't until Jaguar that OS X was good enough for everyone. And it wasn't until Panther that Apple finally surpassed where OS 9 left off. They needed a rapid development cycle in order to make the transition to OS X a successful one. Now that most of the usability aspects have been ironed out, they can concentrate on making it better.

geekstud
Junior Member

Joined: Feb 2001

0

05/18, 05:12pm | report spam | close Reply |
bug fixes vs. new tech

Apple needs to keep up an aggressive release cycle of bug fixes - the new bells and whistles can wait. Sometimes those two separate things are combined into "major updates" (e.g. 10.2 to 10.3), and Apple needs to stop that practice. It's crazy that I can't run a newer version of Safari on 10.2!

salmonstk
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Apr 2004

0

05/18, 05:18pm | report spam | close Reply |
"slow slightly"

I am sure all he means is that the updates will not come out in Septmeber/October like in the past.

I bet Tiger ships in December. So Apple will move from a 12 month cycle to an 18 month cycle.

Only question is what happens at next years Developer conference...

Lyra
Forum Regular

Joined: Jul 2000

0

05/18, 05:18pm | report spam | close Reply |
I cannot wait for 10.5!!

MacOS X 10.5 will be awesome!!!!

It's code name is "Turtle"... 8)

-Nostromo Joe

Faizon318
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Mar 2004

0

05/18, 05:21pm | report spam | close Reply |
Did they call one

Lynx yet ? I like Lynx as a OS name :)

que_ball
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2000

0

05/18, 05:26pm | report spam | close Reply |
36Mo maintenance

Aww gee, and I was just getting a quote on the 3 year Maintenance package for my company. It makes good enough sense for 12month release cycles but at 18 month it's break even at best. Maybe we will just pay each release separately.

Deal
Mac Enthusiast

Joined: Apr 2001

0

05/18, 05:28pm | report spam | close Reply |
It has to be

It has to be Cheetah. You can't leave out the fastest land animal!

Waffle House
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Sep 2002

0

05/18, 06:17pm | report spam | close Reply |
cat

cheetah was os 10.0

bobolicious
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2002

0

05/18, 06:27pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: Makes Sense

I definitely concur - I am finally starting to recommend the 'upgrade' from OS-9 after 3 years of exasperation - critical density of OS-9 features now exists & many new ones are compelling... My only regret is that I jumped in so soon - I think MS actually has the right idea - wait long enough to have things worked out - the law of diminishing returns now applies to Mac OS, which could actually still learn a lot from XP functionality & features such as system restore...

Mac OS-X is actually a $387 US OS if one has kept 'up to date', which compares to XP, but it has set the bar higher in many areas, and is stunningly beautiful in comparison...

beeble
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Mar 2004

0

05/18, 06:53pm | report spam | close Reply |
$387 OS

And DOS 1-6 + Windows 1-XP is how much? What's with the stupid comparisons? If OS X met your needs at 10.0 and you wanted to be on the bleed edge of what was known to be an incomplete OS (even publicly so by Apple) then good for you. If Jag or Panther justified the price to you then great. If not, why are you complaining.

Every year car makers release new cars. People don't go out and buy the new model just because it's there, they buy it because the difference between what they have and the new model are compelling enough to justify the price. Nobody complains each time Ford or GM release a new car.

Apple has had an amazing release cycle. 10.1 was great and a vast improvement on OS 9 even though it was slower. 10.2 was much better all round and 10.3 is better still. Along the way they've introduced all sorts of new technology like hand writing recognition, better universal access and heaps of new features for programmers to take advantage of like web kit.

For me the huge improvements in each new version were compelling enough to buy. It was like 10.0 being a 1912 car, 10.1 being a 1940 Ford Coupe, 10.2 was like a 1967 Corvette and 10.3 is like an F40 Ferrari. We are seeing truly generational changes under the hood so quite the complaining, it makes you like much less intelligent than I'm sure you actually are.

Loco Engr
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Feb 2001

0

05/18, 10:22pm | report spam | close Reply |
Slow Quality

Now there's hope for 10.2.9. Apple should 'fully support' every Mac OS X release for at least 2 years!

buffalolee
Mac Enthusiast

Joined: Oct 2001

0

05/18, 11:54pm | report spam | close Reply |
10.3 is worth it

10.0 = Wasn't worth the trouble
10.1 = Okay, maybe I'll consider it
10.2 = Time to learn Mac OS X
10.3 = Mac OS X is really good
10.4 = ????? Must have OS!!!
10.5 = Well, 10.4 is good enough...

bobolicious
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2002

0

05/19, 12:33am | report spam | close Reply |
Re: $387 OS?

Well I remember 10.0 - for a bublic BETA you'd think there might be an uninstall or restore option...

Then there was 10.1 - it couldn't even import my OE email group addresses & drivers were still lacking for many, many peripherals - so it wasn't particularly useful for much beyond starting from scratch - that wouldn't seem to define 'upgrade'...

Enter 10.2 with GIMP - at least we could hobble together a working system - hardly intuitive or easy - but starting to show promise - still lacking basic OS-9 features like file labels & networking seemed quite quirky...

Panther finally has me going 'woh' more than 'doh!'

The marketeers at Apple were claiming 'panachea' & non-beta from 10.1, as I recall... So when one pays for a non-beta OS what should one be willing to put up with? Hmmm Apple has had it's fans... Many I suspect with rose colored glasses on...

I'm finally falling back into the fold, but it has been a while, and costly...

z10n
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Oct 2003

0

05/19, 05:22pm | report spam | close Reply |
Disagree

"People don't go out and buy the new model just because it's there, they buy it because the difference between what they have and the new model are compelling enough to justify the price. Nobody complains each time Ford or GM release a new car."

While you may be correct in that people shouldn't be driven to always upgrade their software or expect free upgrades, I disagree somewhat with your analyogy. First of all, most car models do not change much from year to year, and the expense of buying a new car is so great that it makes "upgrading" on a regular basis impractical for most people. It used to be that you could easily tell the difference between say, a 1948 and 1949 Chevy. It's not like that any more: most of the time the new model is hardly different at all.

Whereas in the computing world, things change at a blinding pace. Example: several years ago we didn't even have Mac OS X, and now we have an extremely powerful version of it. Since the computer world is so fast paced, I would argue that the ability to stay current factors into people's understanding of their return on investment when they buy a product. I typically will not buy from a software company if reviews state that developers refuse to upgrade the program on a regular basis or neglect to offer upgrade pricing for newer versions of their software. I don't think I'm alone in this, and I also don't think it's an unreasonable expectation. Also, there's a difference between saying current with the operating system vs just a regular software program. The operating system is the basis for your computer, and many times programs rely on that basis for new functionality. If you want the new functionality, you "have" to buy the OS upgrade.

Your point is valid, that people are irrational with this desire. Many times, you really don't NEED the upgrade as much as companies try to make you think you do. But who ever said people are rational?

pharmacopoeia
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Feb 2001

0

05/20, 01:54pm | report spam | close Reply |
I agree with "Disagree"

New operating system upgrades are more like automotive accessories or fuel enhancements than new vehicles. The "driving experience" is improved/expanded but it's still your same car.

Show More Comments

Login Here

toggle

Network Headlines

02/10	Apple sells scaled-back 13-inch MacBook...
02/10	Apple sues Motorola over alleged Qualcomm...
02/10	Leaks: whole MacBook Pro line to drop...
02/10	Jobs did serve on Bush export council...
02/10	Amazon could have Kindle Fire 9-inch...

Show All

02/10	Apple sues Motorola over alleged Qualcomm...
02/10	Leaks: whole MacBook Pro line to drop...
02/10	Amazon could have Kindle Fire 9-inch...
02/09	Google said making self-branded wireless...
02/09	NOAA switches support from BlackBerry...

Show All

02/09	Apple explores environment-sensitive...
02/08	Paul McCartney to perform live concert...
02/06	Microsoft prepping Dynamics CRM apps...
02/03	iBooks Author update clarifies EULA...
02/02	Bug in iTunes Match may switch 'explicit...

Show All

02/10	$380 off refurbished 2.8GHz Mac Pro...
02/09	iHome Dual Alarm Clock for Apple iPod...
02/08	Save 69% on SanDisk Cruzer 32GB USB...
02/07	Refurb. Olympus 14MP Digital Camera...
02/06	17-inch, 2.2GHz MacBook Pro, cut to...

Show All

toggle

Apple to slow the pace of Mac OS X releases

updated 04:45 pm EDT, Tue May 18, 2004

Mac OS X releases to slow

Faster than Longhorn...

No Biggie

Makes Sense

bug fixes vs. new tech

"slow slightly"

I cannot wait for 10.5!!

Did they call one

36Mo maintenance

It has to be

cat

Re: Makes Sense

$387 OS

Slow Quality

10.3 is worth it

Re: $387 OS?

Disagree

I agree with "Disagree"

Login Here

Register for our weekly email newsletter:

Connect tools:

Subscribe

to our RSS

Follow us

on Twitter

10 Most Read

10 Most Discussed

MacNN Marketplace

Apple to slow the pace of Mac OS X releases

updated 04:45 pm EDT, Tue May 18, 2004

Mac OS X releases to slow

Related Articles

Recent Articles

Faster than Longhorn...

No Biggie

Makes Sense

bug fixes vs. new tech

"slow slightly"

I cannot wait for 10.5!!

Did they call one

36Mo maintenance

It has to be

cat

Re: Makes Sense

$387 OS

Slow Quality

10.3 is worth it

Re: $387 OS?

Disagree

I agree with "Disagree"

Login Here

Register for our weekly email newsletter:

Connect tools:

Subscribe

to our RSS

Follow us

on Twitter

10 Most Read

10 Most Discussed

MacNN Marketplace