I have to reluctantly conclude: macOS Monterey is a horrible product, quality-wise

[phrehdd]

I own a little Apple stock so did my symbolic move of voting him out when they had me vote on folks on their board, etc. as a stockholder.

Massive profits will please the people who just care about the stock and investing. But the original Apple was never focused on market domination. It was created by one Steve who truly only cared about the engineering and building the best product he could make, and one Steve who felt that when you build an "insanely great" product? You simply charge more for it, to ensure you stay profitable. But you don't worry about selling as many of them as you possibly can. Having even 10% of the market share of computing devices is a perfectly good place to be, if you're building the ones a selective/choosy audience prefers.

I know car analogies are way overused in the tech community. But Apple has gone from being a Lamborghini to being a Chevrolet. They sell a LOT more units and have a wider product line now, and you can even buy their "upscale" line and get decent performance (kind of like buying a Corvette from Chevy). But they stopped trying to be "elite" in the computer world, and just expect people to keep loyally buying them for the branding/logo.

Having been around since the earliest days of Apple and in the world of IBM PC and clones, I would compare Apple far more to how Nikon was in its best camera days. They built extremely solid performers and charged more than many of their counterparts. Some called it the "Nikon tax" and the rest of us called it peace of mind. Apple's earliest days was much as you said being a solid performer and they would charge a bit more allowing them to not only remain solvent but have the ability to be forward thinking. Sadly like any closed system, they lost a lot of potential buyers as IBM clones and other PC makers did vastly better at entering the business and home market. Apple was now far more like Sony who had Betamax which was better than VHS but opted to keep it closed and lost out. I recall when NEC made some Apple-compatible machines that were allowed in agreement with Apple. This didn't last too long as the NEC machines were cheaper and interestingly, considered superior to Apple's hardware. Apple made sure the NEC machine days did not last long.

I am more than disappointed that the dawn of the M system Apples didn't come with true jump in OS and handling but instead was just a carry over from the Intel days. Here was a real opportunity to return to the best days of Apple that you mention - pay a bit more but you know you have a really good, solid, forward tech performer.

 

[MrCheeto]

I am more than disappointed that the dawn of the M system Apples didn't come with true jump in OS and handling but instead was just a carry over from the Intel days.

Wasn't System 7 and OS 8 a bridge in this same way? Leopard?

To cut the rope-bridge would abandon the majority of your users on the other side. It's branding and market-share suicide.

I will admit that Apple has been willing to rip the bandages off some pretty raw wounds, (No floppy or Serial on the iMac, no optical media or upgradeable RAM with the MacBook Air), but those were praised by some in hindsight. It helped compel us to upgrade and move forward with the times. Who misses the sound of their SuperDrive whirring with every startup and the amount of crap that would accumulate in the slots? When was the last time you were really inconvenienced by not having a built-in optical reader?

On the other hand, you've got to consider what would happen to the people who bought a new Intel Mac the day before the A64 chips rolled out. Should their support have ended right then? No more full OS updates?

I think Apple did very well moving from PPC. For most, it was seamless. The average user probably had no clue whether they had a G4 or a Core Duo and I can attest to this fact as I was repairing these at the time. Tiger was available in both architectures. Then came Leopard which was universal. Finally, Snow Leopard was the fully-commited move to the new platform. That's more than three-and-a-half years to get with the program.

As Apple has adopted a "tick-tock" OS model (Leopard/Snow Leopard, Sierra/High Sierra, Monterey/Ventura) my belief is that the next tick and tock will be the cut. The Intel Mac Pro will have been replaced, ending Apple's Intel sales, and we would have had at least three-years to adopt the new ARM Macs. Does it sound reasonable that whatever "tick" is released after Ventura will be the last version do support x86 Macs and the "tock" will be a clean A64 rewrite?

 

[phrehdd]

Wasn't System 7 and OS 8 a bridge in this same way? Leopard?

To cut the rope-bridge would abandon the majority of your users on the other side. It's branding and market-share suicide.

I will admit that Apple has been willing to rip the bandages off some pretty raw wounds, (No floppy or Serial on the iMac, no optical media or upgradeable RAM with the MacBook Air), but those were praised by some in hindsight. It helped compel us to upgrade and move forward with the times. Who misses the sound of their SuperDrive whirring with every startup and the amount of crap that would accumulate in the slots? When was the last time you were really inconvenienced by not having a built-in optical reader?

On the other hand, you've got to consider what would happen to the people who bought a new Intel Mac the day before the A64 chips rolled out. Should their support have ended right then? No more full OS updates?

I think Apple did very well moving from PPC. For most, it was seamless. The average user probably had no clue whether they had a G4 or a Core Duo and I can attest to this fact as I was repairing these at the time. Tiger was available in both architectures. Then came Leopard which was universal. Finally, Snow Leopard was the fully-commited move to the new platform. That's more than three-and-a-half years to get with the program.

As Apple has adopted a "tick-tock" OS model (Leopard/Snow Leopard, Sierra/High Sierra, Monterey/Ventura) my belief is that the next tick and tock will be the cut. The Intel Mac Pro will have been replaced, ending Apple's Intel sales, and we would have had at least three-years to adopt the new ARM Macs. Does it sound reasonable that whatever "tick" is released after Ventura will be the last version do support x86 Macs and the "tock" will be a clean A64 rewrite?

I appreciate your response here and the time you took to qualify why you believe as you do. The reason I may disagree with you is that Apple could have easily continued with a well flushed in means of supporting software that was designed for Intel (Rosetta + if you will) but remained far more optimized for M architecture and how to fully exploit the cpu/graphic capabilities along with arbitration for external to the board items (whether it is secondary memory as in higher speed RAM sticks or SSDs, audio cards, etc.). If you recall the days of multi-cpu boards and the less than stellar performance due to poor programming and architecture then the move to exploiting far better multi-core, you can see that Apple may have had an opportunity but fell back on old ways here.

 

[MrCheeto]

That’s what I’m saying they’re doing.

Remember when Snow Leopard was optimized for Intel and OpenCL GPU’s? That’s after it jettisoned any support for old Macs.

They have to lend some support for somebody who may not have had their brand new machine for even a year and at this point now not even three-years. Once Apple is ready to take the heat for somebody’s machine that is only five-years-old being labeled obsolete, they will initiate pure A64 streamlining and support.

All of the ARM-based Macs I and those around me use punch above their weight as-is. In that regard, I have no complaints. I’ll gladly wait another two-years to get that sweet pure A64 OS while enjoying whatever benefits the chips give me now.

 

[mikelets456]

Having been around since the earliest days of Apple and in the world of IBM PC and clones, I would compare Apple far more to how Nikon was in its best camera days. They built extremely solid performers and charged more than many of their counterparts. Some called it the "Nikon tax" and the rest of us called it peace of mind. Apple's earliest days was much as you said being a solid performer and they would charge a bit more allowing them to not only remain solvent but have the ability to be forward thinking. Sadly like any closed system, they lost a lot of potential buyers as IBM clones and other PC makers did vastly better at entering the business and home market. Apple was now far more like Sony who had Betamax which was better than VHS but opted to keep it closed and lost out. I recall when NEC made some Apple-compatible machines that were allowed in agreement with Apple. This didn't last too long as the NEC machines were cheaper and interestingly, considered superior to Apple's hardware. Apple made sure the NEC machine days did not last long.

I am more than disappointed that the dawn of the M system Apples didn't come with true jump in OS and handling but instead was just a carry over from the Intel days. Here was a real opportunity to return to the best days of Apple that you mention - pay a bit more but you know you have a really good, solid, forward tech performer.

Nice summary. I haven't been an Apple (Mac) user that long, but I switched about a year ago because I'm not a fan of Bill Gates. But I digress. However, I have a friend that had Macs all his life and I envied how he rarely had to reboot, everything simply worked and was simple to use. But I couldn't afford Macs back in the day and used/build my own Windows computers. I didn't like how I'd get the "blue screen of death" and many other problems. However, I have to admit, when I bought my last lap top (2017 Lenovo---I5 Quad Core) I was amazed how stable Windows 10 and even better, Windows 11 is....

I liked Monterrey and it works well and I am liking Ventura even better (13.2.1). The main reason I'm sticking with it for now is ease of use. I have an Iphone for work and a 12.9" Ipad that I use for Music/Church and other things---but it's "like" a WIFI Mesh system. Everything is integrated into one simple logistical point---Phone with Mac with Ipad with my wife and with the kids. If it wasn't for that I would have a tough time justifying owning "everything" Apple.

For now, Ventura/ Monterrey are stable on both of my Macbooks....But I have to give the edge to Windows 11 at this time. 5 years ago, I would have considered Apple far superior.

Apple needs to revise and revamp because people aren't going to dump $3000 on a laptop unless they're doing graphics intensive applications. One could get a very powerful Windows laptop for 1/3 of the price and do just as much or more. Apple is relying on its base to continue buying and supporting them "just because" they're Apple. I don't know---I don't see that going so well especially if the economy continues to dive.

 

[mxrider88]

That is a feature, not a bug. You upgraded from Monterey to Ventura, but your Mac kept the Monterey recovery. This is so that if something went wrong with the Ventura installation you can still access the known-to-be-good Monterey recovery. Which naturally offers to install Monterey (might be better than only offering to reinstall the broken MacOS again).

The recovery should be upgraded with the next minor point release of Ventura.

That entire recovery/installation process is not optimal in my opinion, but at least there is some logic to it and given how rarely you should have to use any of it, it won't matter that you have to install the older MacOS first and then upgrade it.

And the issues you had with Monterey are certainly due to 3rd party software issues - I am still running Monterey to this day since Ventura is a much worse bugged mess and Monterey works flawlessly on my M1 device. I've used Monterey since the .3 release, so a full year now and it's really the most stable running Mac I've ever seen. Not a single real issue since day 1 with this new Mac.

Ok: If I don't reboot every 3 weeks the Mac will reliably kernel panic somewhere in the 4th week with the same error every time. Certainly some deeper memory management issue or similar that's embarrassing but easily avoidable. In the grand scheme of things a bug that appears every couple weeks and is avoided by rebooting twice a month is really not a problem.


Not even after 4 weeks of uptime? Mine crashes every single time. But even then, that just goes to show that different workflows can impact reliability. Maybe I only get these crashes because I use an external monitor, for example (I don't know the root cause), who knows. Maybe you got a different hardware config, perhaps the 64GiB models crash more rarely than the 32GiB models for example.

On Intel macs you could boot with a key combo and get it to download from the server the latest OS version available. On Apple silicon that option doesn’t exist..

 

[kingtj1971]

Nice summary. I haven't been an Apple (Mac) user that long, but I switched about a year ago because I'm not a fan of Bill Gates. But I digress. However, I have a friend that had Macs all his life and I envied how he rarely had to reboot, everything simply worked and was simple to use. But I couldn't afford Macs back in the day and used/build my own Windows computers. I didn't like how I'd get the "blue screen of death" and many other problems. However, I have to admit, when I bought my last lap top (2017 Lenovo---I5 Quad Core) I was amazed how stable Windows 10 and even better, Windows 11 is....

I liked Monterrey and it works well and I am liking Ventura even better (13.2.1). The main reason I'm sticking with it for now is ease of use. I have an Iphone for work and a 12.9" Ipad that I use for Music/Church and other things---but it's "like" a WIFI Mesh system. Everything is integrated into one simple logistical point---Phone with Mac with Ipad with my wife and with the kids. If it wasn't for that I would have a tough time justifying owning "everything" Apple.

For now, Ventura/ Monterrey are stable on both of my Macbooks....But I have to give the edge to Windows 11 at this time. 5 years ago, I would have considered Apple far superior.

Apple needs to revise and revamp because people aren't going to dump $3000 on a laptop unless they're doing graphics intensive applications. One could get a very powerful Windows laptop for 1/3 of the price and do just as much or more. Apple is relying on its base to continue buying and supporting them "just because" they're Apple. I don't know---I don't see that going so well especially if the economy continues to dive.

Yep! I still prefer Mac OS to using Windows, and all of my complaints about them aren't intended to be me saying they're an inferior purchase to a Windows PC at the present time. I feel it's much more a situation where Apple had a big advantage over Windows for many, many years. But the innovation has really slowed down now, and Windows keeps working on catching up.

With a Mac, it often comes down to the software applications as to why someone is willing to pay a lot more for one. There are just certain products on the Mac that really have no Windows equivalent. I'd argue Keynote is one such program for doing presentations. It started out as a custom written app for Steve Jobs' personal use when giving his famous speeches about new Apple products, and went mainstream as a consumer product. PowerPoint may be the industry standard, but it still lacks the polish you get from making a slide show presentation in Keynote.

Another is the shareware program, GraphicsConverter. It's been a staple item from Lemke Software for Mac users for as far back as I can remember. Fast, lightweight graphics editing and conversion that handles practically every format in existence, and doesn't cost a lot to purchase.

You also have Final Cut Pro if you prefer working with it for video production, and Logic Pro for audio work. Neither are available in Windows editions. Plus, the OS itself provides full native support for working with PDF documents. In Windows, you're usually stuck buying Adobe Acrobat DC or something similar to get the same functionality.

But that said? The older arguments in favor of Mac like essentially not having issues with malware or viruses aren't so valid anymore. Macs still have less, but the risk is real. And newer MacOS releases seem mainly focused on functionality that lets them interact with "sister" applications made for iOS. Not sure that's such a big selling point to somebody who might be on an Android phone to begin with?

 

[dysamoria]

He isn't wrong. MacOS today is less polished than it would have been in 2000. There is always something that doesn't work right or some huge bug. The Apple apologists always have some "Apple does no wrong " angle to counter it with. The sad reality is that Apple doesn't have to get it right anymore. The Mac is not the main source of revenue, nor is it shipped on CD. The "release now, fix later" business model is the new standard unfortunately. Lack of competition and not caring about Mac market share means MacOS will remain a dumpster fire. It's just not a top priority. Everyone is working on questionable inclusive emojis for iOS as that is where the money is. Maybe when the iPhone revenue starts declining they will care.

Yeah, all true, except it's the same issue with iOS: It's a mountain of bugs, and almost none get fixed over multiple major versions. It's not that they focus on iOS. It's that they focus only on bringing "new features" to market, to push sales to the extent that they fix almost no bugs at all, and don't even FINISH developing the features they release before they move on to the next set of "new" stuff.

EDIT: The biggest way iOS causes trouble for Mac OS is where Apple decide to replace Mac OS programs with iOS versions. Every time this happens, the end result is fewer features and more bugs. I've been using Messages in Monterey for a couple days now, since getting my newer used iMac, and while the new features are nice, compared to the High Sierra version I came from, there are SO MANY BUGS that didn't exist in the original versions but DO exist in these ports from iOS. The UI API they're replacing in Mac OS with one developed for iOS is full of bugs too.

I have to conclude that what made Apple special died with Steve Jobs; he was the only person in leadership who cared about fine details. The computer industry is a disaster of failure to attend to details because of Wall Street pathology (ship the next product ASAP) and developer pathology (laziness, blowing off bugs as unavoidable, etc).

 

[dysamoria]

This new version of Messages that Apple ported from iOS is very buggy on Mac OS.

When switching Spaces to Messages, it's not possible to Tab through the interface or type into the message text box without first clicking in it.

The first Tab press takes it to the next UI element and then it sticks there. The only solution is to click in the text field.

This is clearly a bug. Of course, since I'm on Monterey and they are pushing everyone to Ventura, they'll never fix this bug, because Apple never fix stuff. They only break stuff while pushing out something "new".

Apple need to actually USE and TEST their own products. It's at offensive levels of bugs in all products now, because the release cycle is too fast, and there's a waste of resources on garbage like VR/AR glasses and cars.

EDIT: And today I'm discovering that unmounting volumes through sidebars in Finder windows closes those windows even if they're NOT viewing the unmounting volume!! WTF?? EVERY DAY I find MULTIPLE BUGS in Mac OS that were NOT in previous versions. Apple keep BREAKING THINGS that weren't broken! I'm effing FED UP!!

Between the forced replacement of hardware due to OS changes (something I'm generally understanding of when the OS needs to be made more robust and secure, and it's the developers of third party products that are really to blame), and the ENDLESS discovery of usability bugs and functionality bugs all over the place, my experience with Monterey is so far infuriating!

 

[Edgecrusherr]

Apple's software side of things has steadily gone downhill since they were forced to release new OSes every year, no matter what, for the sake of marketing. iOS probably won't ever change, but they would do well to leave a new macOS ever 1.5-2 years. They used to release an OS when it was ready, not on a calendar date.

If they committed to a 2 year realize, announced at WWDC, and released in the fall, that would allow them to for an OS fully working properly before moving onto another one. Then users could have another few months to move to the next OS, after Apple and other developers get all the bugs worked out. This will probably never happen, because the yearly cycle keeps them fresh in mindshare.

Their current refresh cycle is hurting the reliability of their brand. The problem is, the competition in the desktop space (Microsoft and Linux) is so far behind in overall customer satisfaction, that they can continue to get away with being just above mediocre, for the sake of marking hype. They mostly operate in a bubble, most Mac users won't leave for the alternatives, because they so different, and/or love the hardware (like me), and anyone that is wiling to switch when their not happen, and/or anyone who uses multiple platforms (also me), is too small a number to matter.

 

[dysamoria]

Apple's software side of things has steadily gone downhill since they were forced to release new OSes every year, no matter what, for the sake of marketing. iOS probably won't ever change, but they would do well to leave a new macOS ever 1.5-2 years. They used to release an OS when it was ready, not on a calendar date.

If they committed to a 2 year realize, announced at WWDC, and released in the fall, that would allow them to for an OS fully working properly before moving onto another one. Then users could have another few months to move to the next OS, after Apple and other developers get all the bugs worked out. This will probably never happen, because the yearly cycle keeps them fresh in mindshare.

Their current refresh cycle is hurting the reliability of their brand. The problem is, the competition in the desktop space (Microsoft and Linux) is so far behind in overall customer satisfaction, that they can continue to get away with being just above mediocre, for the sake of marking hype. They mostly operate in a bubble, most Mac users won't leave for the alternatives, because they so different, and/or love the hardware (like me), and anyone that is wiling to switch when their not happen, and/or anyone who uses multiple platforms (also me), is too small a number to matter.

Agreed.

I stay with Apple stuff because it's less bad than the alternatives. I absolutely cannot stand Windows and PC hardware. I installed Windows 10 on my latest used iMac for gaming only. Otherwise, I've zero tolerance for it (I was a DOS and Windows user from 1987 to 2008). I originally came to Apple products because they were superior in so many ways. I miss that Apple. Today's Apple is trapped in Wall Street pathology, like what Steve Jobs said about Xerox.

Linux... ha... no thanks. I find computers to require too much nerd/geek BS as is, even on the "friendly" systems (I'm a "born-again user"; sick of having to be tech support for myself, after over a decade of doing it for a job before I ended up on disability... and here I am doing it again, because of the monstrous accumulation of bugs and unfinished features in Apple's products).

 

[kingtj1971]

Agreed.

I stay with Apple stuff because it's less bad than the alternatives. I absolutely cannot stand Windows and PC hardware. I installed Windows 10 on my latest used iMac for gaming only. Otherwise, I've zero tolerance for it (I was a DOS and Windows user from 1987 to 2008). I originally came to Apple products because they were superior in so many ways. I miss that Apple. Today's Apple is trapped in Wall Street pathology, like what Steve Jobs said about Xerox.

Linux... ha... no thanks. I find computers to require too much nerd/geek BS as is, even on the "friendly" systems (I'm a "born-again user"; sick of having to be tech support for myself, after over a decade of doing it for a job before I ended up on disability... and here I am doing it again, because of the monstrous accumulation of bugs and unfinished features in Apple's products).

I like Linux but at the end of the day? The entire thing was an OS written to mimic Unix as used on server class systems. The only framework for a GUI on those was the X Windowing environment, which was really basic and designed around compatibility with dumb terminals as much as full-blown computers.

It's come a LONG way, obviously, with so many developers taking a shot at modernizing and extending it over the decades. But you're still left with a super reliable base OS that's not about anything "user friendly", vs rock-solid reliable for maximum server uptime, plus all the "bolted on" things that may be far less reliable than the core of it.

Linux is a decent solution for anyone doing software development with a language it supports. That's why even companies like Dell took a crack at offering Linux certified and pre-installed notebook computers. But it's never *really* been a practical choice for the user who wants everything to look elegant, "just work" and have plenty of easy to install commercial software options to run on it.

 

[dysamoria]

Here's another issue with Monterey: Apparently I cannot use SD cards in the SD card slot of my iMac because Monterey needs me to repeatedly reset the SMC or the PRAM (or whatever the hell it's called anymore) every time I want to use it. Last time, that did work, but I've done nothing to make it stop working. It just doesn't work anymore. I'm assuming it relates to standby/sleep mode, but JFC, that's supposed to Just Work, right??

I've sent bug reports to Apple EVERY DAY since I updated to Monterey, and several times on multiple days, like today (because of text editing keyboard bugs, or UI API inconsistency, who can frelling tell with Apple anymore) and this SD card reader being useless.

Like I said, it's not just Apple. I hate this industry with a passion. However, Apple USED TO BE BETTER.

 

[kingtj1971]

Here's another issue with Monterey: Apparently I cannot use SD cards in the SD card slot of my iMac because Monterey needs me to repeatedly reset the SMC or the PRAM (or whatever the hell it's called anymore) every time I want to use it. Last time, that did work, but I've done nothing to make it stop working. It just doesn't work anymore. I'm assuming it relates to standby/sleep mode, but JFC, that's supposed to Just Work, right??

I've sent bug reports to Apple EVERY DAY since I updated to Monterey, and several times on multiple days, like today (because of text editing keyboard bugs, or UI API inconsistency, who can frelling tell with Apple anymore) and this SD card reader being useless.

Like I said, it's not just Apple. I hate this industry with a passion. However, Apple USED TO BE BETTER.

There was a similar issue with the card reader slot on all of the M1 Max Macbook Pro 16" models when they first came out. To be honest, I didn't even keep up with it after a little while to see if it was ever resolved or not. But people were exchanging the computers as defective, at first, with mixed results with replacement machines Apple gave them back.

Whole thing sounded to me like issues that either happened or didn't based on which particular chipset or revision of one that happened to get used in a given Macbook Pro's logic board when it was built?

I was an early M1 Mac owner but decided right off the bat to just use the SD card reader built into a USB-C multi-port dongle adapter I was already using to attach my wired Ethernet to the machine. It seemed to work reliably so no reason to risk corrupting a Micro SD card full of data, if the built-in reader was acting up.

 

[dysamoria]

There was a similar issue with the card reader slot on all of the M1 Max Macbook Pro 16" models when they first came out. To be honest, I didn't even keep up with it after a little while to see if it was ever resolved or not. But people were exchanging the computers as defective, at first, with mixed results with replacement machines Apple gave them back.

Whole thing sounded to me like issues that either happened or didn't based on which particular chipset or revision of one that happened to get used in a given Macbook Pro's logic board when it was built?

I was an early M1 Mac owner but decided right off the bat to just use the SD card reader built into a USB-C multi-port dongle adapter I was already using to attach my wired Ethernet to the machine. It seemed to work reliably so no reason to risk corrupting a Micro SD card full of data, if the built-in reader was acting up.

Shameful behavior by the previously excellent Apple, but typical for the industry overall… and today’s Apple. So depressing and infuriating that most of the world just tolerates this as normal.

 

[MYZ]

I wouldn't be depressed, more so happy that the computer doesn't crash every hour.

A 10x increase in under-the-hood complexity implies ~100x increase in debugging work, and Apple certainly did not 100x the resources they spend on Mac software compared to 2012. Probably not even 5x. So it's a decent effort given that huge disparity.