Hints of new Apple OS coming in June

[David Polich]

This paragraph from a CNN story on the upcoming Apple WDC in June caught my eye -

"There's also good chance we'll get an update to OS X, following up Mavericks with a new Mac operating system, 10.10. Apple could also update the MacBook, iMac and MacBook Air with new, faster processors. The MacBook Air might finally get "retina display," Apple's term for its high-res screens."

I'm thinking that this will be (just as I have said over the past year) "Blue Mavericks" or
"Mavericks Gold" which will fix a lot of what has been wrong with Mavericks. And thus follow
Apple's record of fixing Leopard with Snow Leopard and Lion with Mountain Lion.

[bayswater]

I'm thinking that this will be (just as I have said over the past year) "Blue Mavericks" or "Mavericks Gold" which will fix a lot of what has been wrong with Mavericks. And thus follow Apple's record of fixing Leopard with Snow Leopard and Lion with Mountain Lion.

We can only hope. I like Finder tabs, but otherwise Mavericks is a big disappointment.

[Prime Mover]

I've actually found Mavericks to be very stable and usable... and frankly, boring. I barely remember the difference between ML and Mavericks.

And as for the name? I doubt the next one will have "Mavericks" in the title. I think Apple is eager to establish their new naming scheme of using California locations. There are still many people who don't get it and think it's some sort of weird Sarah Palin reference. If Apple is smart (which they usually are), they'll quickly choose another name so people will go, "Oh! So That's what the names are!".

I don't think they need to have a direct follow up either. Maybe Mavericks wasn't the smoothest of rides for some, but let's face it, when compared to Lion and Leopard, Mavericks was rock solid. Those OSs needed surgery, STAT, Maverick's just needs to evolve a bit.

Oh, and it shouldn't take a brain surgeon to figure out that Apple will release a new OS in the next 6 months, they've been releasing one a year, now, for about 6 years in a row. I'd put my money on a September release, though, as that's what they've commonly done. Expect the announcement at the expo in June, though.

[bayswater]

I've actually found Mavericks to be very stable and usable... and frankly, boring. I barely remember the difference between ML and Mavericks.

The fact that we have such a varied experience with Mavericks is what makes is so bad. No one know's what will happen until they try it out. I don't have any problems that render it unusable, but a lot annoying little things, even on fresh partitions with little other than standard Apple apps and utilities.

1. I have to restart every 2-3 days. I could run 10.6 for months.
2. Input control is frequently interrupted as if I don't have a mouse or keyboard.
3. Closing a window by clicking on the upper left red button hardly ever works on the first attempt.
4. Starting up the OS or an app for the first time takes much longer than it did with earlier OS versions.
5. The OS presents object before they are usable, rather than when they are ready to execute.
6. Wifi is less stable on my macs with 10.9 and all are on the same local network.

... and so on. Some of these things are reminiscent of the early releases of XP. I wonder if it has something to do with the OS spending a lot of its time looking after itself and its security, and needing to integrate with everything on the planet (as per Little Snitch reports, 10.9 is constantly calling home) rather than prioritizing what the user wants to do.

[billf]

This paragraph from a CNN story on the upcoming Apple WDC in June caught my eye -

"There's also good chance we'll get an update to OS X, following up Mavericks with a new Mac operating system, 10.10

10.10?

That seems like too fast of a release cycle for my liking. 10.9 isn't even a year old, and they are still working on bug fixes.

[Prime Mover]

bayswater, I'm sorry that your system was behaving so badly. Mine is too, but that's because the hard drive crashed, now that I have the old one back in (still running 10.9) it's fine. I've never experienced any of the problems you mention. As you say, that's bad.

However, I still haven't heard the outcry I heard over 10.7 (which I happily skipped) and definitely not that of 10.5 (which I unfortunately didn't skip). No, it's no 10.6... but face it, an OS10.6 or DP7.24 only comes along once in a blue moon. I'm hearing about the same reaction to 10.9 as 10.8, really.

All I'm saying is .5 and .7 were abominations that needed an overhaul and second chance, hence Snow and Mountain, but I'm not convinced .9 is in that same category. Plus, does Apple really want everyone to think that it's okay for every other OS to suck and need an overhaul? If they do it one more time, you can bet everyone will catch on and skip .11.

I just hope to god that Apple doesn't feel like they need to make an OS11. I think they're on a roll, to some degree, I'd hate for them to feel the need to start again from the ground up like Microsoft seems to do every 5 years. Love Apple's "evolution, not revolution" style of development.

[mikehalloran]

If the conflicts that are causing the problems with 10.9 aren't found and fixed, it's unlikely to expect 10.10 to fix them.

Although 10.7 flies in the face of that logic. Its many issues were partially resolved by 10.8.2 and others waited for Mavericks which is rock solid and stable for me.

I had all of the problems in 10.8.2 that people complain about in Mavericks. Once I found and removed the two files that caused the problems, they went away. Except one and that is caused by a firmware issue with certain ATi video cards in some iMacs and Mac Pros introduced with 10.8 - but there are workarounds for that.

[Thomas.B.]

I found Mavericks rather stable but I have created a clean install of Mavericks rather than updating my previous OS X. Time Machine makes it incredibly easy to install a clean OS X with every new update. Once the new OS X is installed you can simply connect you backup drive maintained by Time Machine and have everything up and running a heartbeat.

I agree, however, that I can live without most of the new features introduced in Mavericks and don't anticipate any 'must have features' in the upcoming OS X that make my DAW run better. We will see...

[bayswater]

I found Mavericks rather stable but I have created a clean install of Mavericks rather than updating my previous OS X. Time Machine makes it incredibly easy to install a clean OS X with every new update. Once the new OS X is installed you can simply connect you backup drive maintained by Time Machine and have everything up and running a heartbeat.

Two questions: 1) do you know for a fact that the initial installation of Mavericks on a drive that has a previous version of OS X is not a complete new installation? In other words, installing 10.9.0 selectively overwrites some aspects of the previous OS versions and leaves others in place? 2) when you restored your data with Time Machine, did it restore all of your authorizations? That's the part that that keeps me from a complete erase and install: the last time I did this, it took the better part of three days to hunt down all the codes and re-authorize everything.

[Thomas.B.]

1) do you know for a fact that the initial installation of Mavericks on a drive that has a previous version of OS X is not a complete new installation? In other words, installing 10.9.0 selectively overwrites some aspects of the previous OS versions and leaves others in place? 2) when you restored your data with Time Machine, did it restore all of your authorizations? That's the part that that keeps me from a complete erase and install: the last time I did this, it took the better part of three days to hunt down all the codes and re-authorize everything.

1) All I know is that I did not perform a clean install on my wife's laptop and it is running very slowly. It's basically a 10.6 installation that was upgraded to 10.7, 10.8 and now 10.9.
2) Most of them were transferred but not all of them. I can't remember which ones I had to re-authorize but it was not a major endeavor.

If you want to give it a shot you can always create a clone of your current installation with SuperDuper or Carbon Copy Cloner before creating a clean install. That way you can always go back to your current installation if things don't work out.

There is a helpful Macworld article about the pros and cons of performing a clean install of Mavericks:
http://www.macworld.com/article/2056563 ... ricks.html

[mhschmieder]

Normally I have little interest in OS updates as I prefer stability to a constantly moving target, due to all the interdependencies and how many things tend to break.

Mavericks sucks so bad though, that for once I can hardly wait for the next version. I do hope that their focus this time is on stability and regaining their reputation for an OS that historically has been more reliable than other commercial OS's (excepting the long-dead Amiga).

[mhschmieder]

Also, I have an additional point of view on Mavericks that is completely unrelated to Digital Performer, Kontakt, and other stuff related to music production.

I am a developer, and usually the sole developer, for a very complicated app that requires wearing more hats than an average team of 30 people or more. I simply can't afford for the few things I can normally trust to be reliable to degrade on me; my job is literally on the line. No one cares whose fault it is when software breaks. Mavericks is the most disastrous OS from a developer point of view that I can ever remember dealing with, and workarounds are scarce.

[Thomas.B.]

Mavericks is the most disastrous OS from a developer point of view that I can ever remember dealing with, and workarounds are scarce.

That is interesting. From a user’s perspective Mavericks seems a lot better than 10.7 and 10.8.

I suspect that Apple's increased security requirements are causing difficulties for most developers. There is a lot more pain to come. On Analog Industries’ blog a very outspoken developer gave a blow by blow account of being informed by Apple that Logic Audio will be sandboxed in the next update and all plug-ins will have to follow suit. Within days a coalition was formed by a number of plug-in developers that was able to make Apple back down from their ‘security is not optional’ stance. At least that is how it was described in the comment section underneath the original blog entry apply named 'Sandbolloxed...': http://www.analogindustries.com/b1863/Sandbolloxed/

[bayswater]

From a user’s perspective Mavericks seems a lot better than 10.7 and 10.8.

Not this user. Not since the earlier releases of XP have I cursed at my laptop so much.

[Shooshie]

From a user’s perspective Mavericks seems a lot better than 10.7 and 10.8.

Not this user. Not since the earlier releases of XP have I cursed at my laptop so much.

I've consistently found Mavericks to be deplorable, and have lost many, many hours searching the logs for clues as to why. (finding none) I've had to change the way I work in many ways, not just one, to accommodate what I believe to be merely stupid errors on the part of the programmers. I'm not saying they are stupid people, just that carelessness got through the cracks, and they have not gone back to fix it. THAT is stupid. My conversations with friends often turn to this same topic, and not on my urging. Everyone is saying it.

But I've beaten this horse to death; I won't repeat all that here.



Shooshie