Some features that worked great no longer work as well or have bugs for example I used to use Airdrop to transfer images from my iPhone until it started calling them all the same name rather than moving over the actual file name for them, it really makes it difficult to use a features when you transfer 15 or 20 unrelated images and they are all all called Fullsizerender and are out of sequence from the order they were taken. Trouble is if you make it look fresh each year rather than focus on fixing the bugs within or curing regular bugs then people look elsewhere. I'm way more concerned with mobility across platforms and form factors than knowing how many features you're adding, or even caring about the features you add that will have me scurrying to get that one specific device where it's usable.Īpple are probably finding it hard to find something to make it look exciting each year. Yes, it's a nice OS X feature (being able to put files there and access them elsewhere), but because it's so poorly implemented on their other form factors it makes the feature a non-factor to me. How is a new feature in OS X going to help me on my iPhone when I am away from my PC and can't access it.Įxample: How does the iCloud Drive integration in Finder help me, when it's so poorly done in OS X? End result is I use an alternate cloud service. Not about the features per se, but how are you going to better integrate services and how are you going to make my devices work better together.Īs I own more and more devices of various form factors, I care more about cohesiveness of user experience when moving from one device to the next, and not necessarily about specific features limited to one form factor. This is really the only thing I pay attention to when I watch keynotes or whatever. And to do that, you need all platforms to be in virtual lock-step with each other otherwise the entire user experience is broken. Its getting to the point where the only way to add "great" value to a Desktop OS is though interoperability with other devices (TV, Smartphone, Tablet, etc.) and service integration. And Apple is surely ready to adapt and change if it looks like it's the right move. I'm willing to bet that Apple is taking a very long look at what Microsoft is doing with Windows 10. So I wouldn't make any assumptions based on Apple's track record thus far. It's done the same with iWork apps like Pages, Keynote, and Numbers.Īt least when it comes to Apple, it's dangerous to assume that past behavior is a good indicator of future action. Just look at Apple's app development efforts: Final Cut Pro users were furious with Apple when it went to Final Cut Pro X because it removed or changed functionality. ![]() Would that cause fewer problems for users, administrators, and developers, or would it be an even bigger headache?Īpple's not afraid to cause short-term discomfort for long-term benefit. I've talked before about some of the issues that Yosemite users have had, like unreliable Continuity features, trouble with new networking technology, and more.Īn incremental, iterative approach might give Apple an opportunity to introduce new technology more gradually. Given that, should Apple consider Microsoft's "last OS ever" approach?While Mac users have adopted new OS X releases in large numbers, there certainly have been some growing pains. And you might be right.Īpple's not afraid to cause short-term discomfort for long-term benefit. So you can argue that Apple has nothing to gain by taking a more iterative approach - that its current system works just fine. In fact, Yosemite has been Apple's fastest adoption yet. ![]() ![]() Mac users have upgraded to new releases in large numbers ever since. ![]() Beginning with the release of Lion, Mac OS X 10.7, Apple adopted an annual upgrade cycle, and they made the new OS free.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |