Should macOS 14 be an update like macOS Snow Leopard?

[iAppleOrchard]

Greetings! macOS .0 updates over the past couple of years have been pretty buggy lately. Last time we got an update that focused on bug fixes and improvements was Mac OS X Snow Leopard. It was (and kinda still is) considered the greatest macOS version to be made.

Now that brings us to today. macOS Ventura has been having some issues.

My biggest one is the clock app not playing alarms most of the time.
(Bruh Apple)

I am also aware that people have been having issues with external displays as well, but as of right now, I have not had one.

I also understand Apple is a company that want good animations. Despite macOS being the best OS in my opinion, I believe that iOS and iPadOS animations are more fluid and smooth. We don't have a close app animation. In my opinion, we should. If Apple listens to the community and makes macOS 14 an update focused on bug fixes and enhancements, it would immediately become the greatest version of macOS to date.

What do you think about the idea of macOS 14 being the second Snow Leopard?

 

[russell_314]

I think they need to work on a version of iOS and macOS just for bug fixes. They’re under so much pressure to innovate but they’re losing the “it just works” thing.

 

[galad]

Mac OS X Snow Leopard had so many under the hood changes and radically new frameworks and api, and a completely rewritten Finder (from 32 bit Carbon to 64 bit Cocoa), that I still wonder why people think it was a bug fixes release. It wasn't at all.

 

[thejadedmonkey]

Mac OS X Snow Leopard had so many under the hood changes and radically new frameworks and api, and a completely rewritten Finder (from 32 bit Carbon to 64 bit Cocoa), that I still wonder why people think it was a bug fixes release. It wasn't at all.

Because Steve Jobs said it was a bugfix release, and the quality of the software increased measurably after it came out.

That doesn't mean you can't replace old software with new identical software - usually writing something a 2nd or 3rd time is far less buggy than the first time - just that it also improved reliability.

 

[iAppleOrchard]

Mac OS X Snow Leopard had so many under the hood changes and radically new frameworks and api, and a completely rewritten Finder (from 32 bit Carbon to 64 bit Cocoa), that I still wonder why people think it was a bug fixes release. It wasn't at all.

It was advertised as being a bug fix update with no features.

 

[iAppleOrchard]

I think they need to work on a version of iOS and macOS just for bug fixes. They’re under so much pressure to innovate but they’re losing the “it just works” thing.

Yeah, Apple should also do the same with watchOS and tvOS. I am fine not having any new features if it will fix stuff and no devices will be dropped from support.

 

[cmChimera]

Not until they fix the Music app.

 

[iAppleOrchard]

Not until they fix the Music app.

 What if they rewrite the music app in macOS 14? Base it off of Catalyst. OS X Snow Leopard rewrote the Finder. 

 

[cmChimera]

 What if they rewrite the music app in macOS 14? Base it off of Catalyst. OS X Snow Leopard rewrote the Finder. 

I would be happy with that haha

 

[galad]

Snow Leopard was just business as usual, and delayed because of iPhone.
But if you want to believe marketing, do as you wish

 

[russell_314]

Yeah, Apple should also do the same with watchOS and tvOS. I am fine not having any new features if it will fix stuff and no devices will be dropped from support.

I don’t even care about Apple dropping devices from support because they keep supporting devices significantly longer than anyone else. If they kept the status quo on that it’s perfect.

My issue is why does a release version of an operating system feel like a beta. It shouldn’t be that way. Product buyers shouldn’t be beta testers. Yes, I know Microsoft does this now, but Apple should be better than this.

They really need to improve their team. Maybe they’re short staffed, I don’t know.

 

[PsykX]

Yes, I've definitely seen Apple's software quality go down in the last 10 years.

What they need to fix the most is everything related to their cloud services. It never really worked. I suspect they used the foundation of MobileMe, which has been unreliable all the time.

 

[Apple Knowledge Navigator]

I think a big issue today is that, more than ever, Apple is under pressure to maintain synergy across its software and platforms. The alleged benefit of this is to provide more seamless user experiences; someone who is new to a particular platform will recognise features on another, and vice versa.

But the downsides to this are the relevancy of said features (Stage Manager is a prime example) and the time required to iron out kinks across its platforms and multiple generations of hardware.

Now, I've been using Macs since the early 2000s and have used or owned every OS in that time. An OS is not a linear product that simply has features added to it, it's constantly evolving as computing trends change with the market and industry. So whilst I question the sentiment that macOS has become more buggy during that time (though early OS X happened to be quite unstable), what I will say is that it has definitely become more unfocused, which is somewhat ironic given Apple's efforts to compartmentalise our work/life habits.

Is that Apple's fault? It's difficult to say. One point that I make on these forums time and time again when people complain about a lack of meaningful 'big' features is that there is only so much you can modify on a notebook to make it new, better each year. And an unfortunate consequence of the 'Apple eco-system' is that if we want everything to be seamless across devices and share experiences, then the development becomes more fragmented.

My (admittedly bold) long-term view is that, by the end of next decade, there will be just one Apple operating system with the defining feature being that features are scaled back depending on the platform: iPhone at the bottom, Mac at the top. Some might say that we already have this to a degree, but it's actually only in principle, not code form, and I believe the writing has been on the wall for some time with the moves Apple's made with it's hardware and software.

 

[Corefile]

Mac OS X Snow Leopard had so many under the hood changes and radically new frameworks and api, and a completely rewritten Finder (from 32 bit Carbon to 64 bit Cocoa), that I still wonder why people think it was a bug fixes release. It wasn't at all.

Not forgetting the UI changes they said wouldn't happen but did. Bug fixes and new features are not mutually exclusive so can be fixed in parallel. All bug fixes in 12.6 should feed into 13.0 so there shouldn't be regressions with legacy features. If there are then that's down to terrible QA.

 

[Corefile]

Snow Leopard was just business as usual, and delayed because of iPhone.
But if you want to believe marketing, do as you wish

That was Leopard I think.

 

[frou]

The only reason I'd pine for Snow Leopard is not lack of bugs, but because the subsequent Lion is when the MacOS document model got all weird, and introduced various forms of autosave/autorestore, sometimes didn't show Save/Save-As by default in the File menu (?) and introduced all the Duplicate/Move-To/... stuff.

All of that has been through several revisions since then, so I think I've forgotten some of the original horrors, but I still can't be bothered to fully familiarise myself with it 😬

 

[G46&Fbnth5]

The next “Snow Leopard” will come when they drop support for Intel Macs, so I think macOS 15.

 

[iAppleOrchard]

The next “Snow Leopard” will come when they drop support for Intel Macs, so I think macOS 15.

I was thinking a big update to macOS when they drop support for Intel Macs.

 

[Brien]

Yes please. macOS/iOS are mature enough platforms I could be fine without new features for a few years.

 

[G46&Fbnth5]

I was thinking a big update to macOS when they drop support for Intel Macs.

Snow Leopard dropped support for Power Macs and a huge part of the code was rewritten and optimized for Intel Macs; that’s why I expect Apple is going to do the same with the first OS exclusive to Arm hardware, but of course I could be wrong 😊

 

[Aston441]

I don’t even care about Apple dropping devices from support because they keep supporting devices significantly longer than anyone else. <snip>

What are you on? The only OS maker Apple supports devices longer for is Google/Android.

Linux support is forever.

Windows support close to forever.

Even IBM support is longer than Apple.

Apple is döshsak.

 

[gilby101]

Linux support is forever.

Windows support close to forever.

Even IBM support is longer than Apple.

Your idea of forever is different to mine!

Thinking of support as to how long you can expect serious bug and security fixes (not phone support) for free:

Linux: Ubuntu LTS support for 5 years.
Windows: A version of Windows 10 from 2015 to 2025. Windows 7 from 2009 to 2020. Windows XP from 2001 to 2014.
IBM: I don't know much about IBM, but do they have any free support? That might well be forever (if you can afford it).

The longer (than Apple) support by Microsoft and Ubuntu (and other Linux) is financed by enterprise customers. Apple is consumer focused and consumers don't want to pay for support.

 

[russell_314]

What are you on? The only OS maker Apple supports devices longer for is Google/Android.

Linux support is forever.

Windows support close to forever.

Even IBM support is longer than Apple.

Apple is döshsak.

Linux supports what devices forever?

Microsoft (Windows) supports what devices close to forever?

 

[AltecX]

Your idea of forever is different to mine!

Thinking of support as to how long you can expect serious bug and security fixes (not phone support) for free:

Linux: Ubuntu LTS support for 5 years.
Windows: A version of Windows 10 from 2015 to 2025. Windows 7 from 2009 to 2020. Windows XP from 2001 to 2014.
IBM: I don't know much about IBM, but do they have any free support? That might well be forever (if you can afford it).

The longer (than Apple) support by Microsoft and Ubuntu (and other Linux) is financed by enterprise customers. Apple is consumer focused and consumers don't want to pay for support.

Windows 7 is still getting patches for huge 0-day issues. In terms of hardware life yes 10+yrs is forever. Most businesses refresh machines every 3-4 years and home users by the end of 5-7. Even then if you bought a high end 64bit machine with XP you can still be running Windows 10 on it and be supported. So that machine will have been supported until Windows 10 is EOL. Effectively a 17yr life time.

 

[KoolAid-Drink]

I think a big issue today is that, more than ever, Apple is under pressure to maintain synergy across its software and platforms. The alleged benefit of this is to provide more seamless user experiences; someone who is new to a particular platform will recognise features on another, and vice versa.

But the downsides to this are the relevancy of said features (Stage Manager is a prime example) and the time required to iron out kinks across its platforms and multiple generations of hardware.

Now, I've been using Macs since the early 2000s and have used or owned every OS in that time. An OS is not a linear product that simply has features added to it, it's constantly evolving as computing trends change with the market and industry. So whilst I question the sentiment that macOS has become more buggy during that time (though early OS X happened to be quite unstable), what I will say is that it has definitely become more unfocused, which is somewhat ironic given Apple's efforts to compartmentalise our work/life habits.

Is that Apple's fault? It's difficult to say. One point that I make on these forums time and time again when people complain about a lack of meaningful 'big' features is that there is only so much you can modify on a notebook to make it new, better each year. And an unfortunate consequence of the 'Apple eco-system' is that if we want everything to be seamless across devices and share experiences, then the development becomes more fragmented.

My (admittedly bold) long-term view is that, by the end of next decade, there will be just one Apple operating system with the defining feature being that features are scaled back depending on the platform: iPhone at the bottom, Mac at the top. Some might say that we already have this to a degree, but it's actually only in principle, not code form, and I believe the writing has been on the wall for some time with the moves Apple's made with it's hardware and software.

That's what I was thinking also. Probably be called appleOS. I'd expect the bottom to be Watch, though, not iPhone. I'm thinking once Intel is dropped in around 2025-2027 or so, then maybe 2028 or 2029 would be when we'd see appleOS. By then, iOS would already have been in its early 20s, and macOS would be around version 19-20. Too convoulted and high. A new, single OS to rule them all is probably the end goal at Apple.