Catalina - for lack of a better word

[mikecwest]

Do you?

Here is what is not:
1. A build of software that is exempt from complaint and criticism.
2. A build of software that is expected to have critical flaws.
3. A build of software that is supposed to just not work.

1. It is a build of software's there should be "complained and criticized about," to provide feedback to developers about bugs, annoyances, dislikes, etc...
2. It is a build of software, that should not be expected to be free from critical flaws, the hope with a beta, is that the beta tester will FIND any flaws and report them. It however does not mean they should be 'expected,' but you must acknowledge the possibility of those flaws appearing.
3. A build of software, that has the possibility to no work, but should not be "expected to not work." If it does not work in a testers environment, the tester is supposed to report feedback, and try to provide details, to correct that problem before it leaves a beta phase.

Most of all, anytime you run beta software, you should not "expect" it to "run flawlessly."

It seems that there are certain companies, that release software in persistent "beta" status, I won't name any names, but that is confusing for some people. It offers an unrealistic expectation of beta software.

Alpha software, is even less refined, and some might argue that certain "beta" releases should have remained "alpha" at this point.
[doublepost=1565557860][/doublepost]

Do you?

Here is what is not:
1. A build of software that is exempt from complaint and criticism.
2. A build of software that is expected to have critical flaws.
3. A build of software that is supposed to just not work.

1. It is a build of software's there should be "complained and criticized about," to provide feedback to developers about bugs, annoyances, dislikes, etc...
2. It is a build of software, that should not be expected to be free from critical flaws, the hope with a beta, is that the beta tester will FIND any flaws and report them. It however does not mean they should be 'expected,' but you must acknowledge the possibility of those flaws appearing.
3. A build of software, that has the possibility to no work, but should not be "expected to not work." If it does not work in a testers environment, the tester is supposed to report feedback, and try to provide details, to correct that problem before it leaves a beta phase.

Most of all, anytime you run beta software, you should not "expect" it to "run flawlessly."

It seems that there are certain companies, that release software in persistent "beta" status, I won't name any names, but that is confusing for some people. It offers an unrealistic expectation of beta software.

Alpha software, is even less refined, and some might argue that certain "beta" releases should have remained "alpha" at this point.

 

[iamdavid]

Do you?

Here is what is not:
1. A build of software that is exempt from complaint and criticism.
2. A build of software that is expected to have critical flaws.
3. A build of software that is supposed to just not work.

Here is what it is:
- A build of software, that is likely only 6 weeks away from public release. Or rather I should say wider public release, as it has already been released to the public (not just developers) with the "beta" label.

At the stage that we are right now, it is correct to expect far more stability than what we have from the current build.

It is also surprising to me that people don't realize how ridiculous they sound when they use the "its beta" reply to any/all commentary. If this were other forums, that do a more targeted job of moderating based on specific content and not just vague rules, a response like "its beta" would be an instanban.

Well, I have installed the latest public beta on a spare SSD on my Mac Pro 5,1, and it runs as fast as Mojave, with Geekbench scores around 27,000, still one or two glitches but it generally works very well.

 

[PastaPrimav]

Well, I have installed the latest public beta on a spare SSD on my Mac Pro 5,1, and it runs as fast as Mojave, with Geekbench scores around 27,000, still one or two glitches but it generally works very well.

How it runs isolated on a clean install is meaningless. All that matters is how it behaves as an update to existing install.

 

[ZeitGeist]

How it runs isolated on a clean install is meaningless. All that matters is how it behaves as an update to existing install.

That’s not “all that matters”

 

[mikecwest]

How it runs isolated on a clean install is meaningless. All that matters is how it behaves as an update to existing install.

It isn't meaningless to someone that installed it on a clean system, for whatever reasons they might have done so.

 

[crjackson2134]

OP, I’ve been testing DP’s for MANY years and there is a cyclical like rhythm to the stability. The simple answer is, if it doesn’t work well for you when released, just skip it and wait for the next one.

Sometimes stability is related to a particular machine model, sometimes a particular machine, sometimes all models are affected. When OS modules are updated in one area, it often and usually causes problems in another. The more sweeping the changes and upgraded the features, the deeper the cycle. It’s normal, it’s expected, and I’ve seen it many times regardless of OS. macOS in general is very stable code in my view. You should work with some Linux distro’s for comparison.

All that said, it’s not a steaming pile at all. I’m not particularly fond of Catalina because it places artificial limitations on many machines unnecessarily and the ever changing structure of the file system is a rapidly moving target.

I expect Catalina will be an “okay” release, but in my eyes, it’s just laying the ground work for a really stable release of Catalina +1 (10.16 ?). That should be the start of the next upswing cycle.

Just my 2¢

 

[iamdavid]

I would never run a beta version as an update, that breaks the first rule of using a beta version. Secondly, it is totally not meaningless as I will be unable to update my system on my Mac Pro 5,1, it will have to be a clean install and then I can transfer my files across using Migration assistant.

I do get pissed off with the arrogance of people who think they know what they're talking about.

 

[fisherking]

I would never run a beta version as an update, that breaks the first rule of using a beta version. Secondly, it is totally not meaningless as I will be unable to update my system on my Mac Pro 5,1, it will have to be a clean install and then I can transfer my files across using Migration assistant.

I do get pissed off with the arrogance of people who think they know what they're talking about.

wouldn't that include you, me... and everyone here?...

 

[iamdavid]

All I seem to read on these forums (fora?) are people complaining and whingeing. Why not just get a Windows machine and then you really will have something to complain about. I have just tried to report my own experiences with Catalina on my old 5,1 Mac Pro. I do not think that is arrogant I see it as trying to help others.

I will not respond to this aspect of mine nor anyone else's postings from now on.

 

[fisherking]

All I seem to read on these forums (fora?) are people complaining and whingeing. Why not just get a Windows machine and then you really will have something to complain about. I have just tried to report my own experiences with Catalina on my old 5,1 Mac Pro. I do not think that is arrogant I see it as trying to help others.

I will not respond to this aspect of mine nor anyone else's postings from now on.

i hate all the whining & complaining too (& spend way too much time pointing these behaviors out). but.. a sense of humor helps. read my previous post again: am including myself, and everyone AND a grinning face; it's not serious...

 

[iamdavid]

Yes You are right of course... personally I do not mind a few roadblocks when a new OS is under development, to me it's all fun just sorting things out. Hence my pleasure at being able to install and run Catalina on a 9 year old Mac Pro, and it is gratifying when people in these communities reach out and help. I just get down when some seem to spend all their time complaining. I do not think this is the place for that. Why not tell Apple, either on their communities or through the feedback assistant?

There, I said I wouldn't reply so please do not read this(!)