I have multiple partitions on my HD. I installed Catalina on one of them on my 2014 Mac mini 2.6ghz. It was very buggy. So I went back to the Mojave Desert. It was a long hike but it was worth it.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Is macOS Catalina Apple's Vista?
- Thread starter handheldgames
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If we need to pick one thing out of context then that's fine, but still it was stated Apple has been doing this same action over almost 2 decades. Meaning this is not a new action. It is more of a known occurrence.
And simply because Microsoft did not change the public facing naming structure does not specifically mean that OS does not change drastically. Many of those Windows 10 updates / fixes / service packs / etc, drastically change the operating system. Enough that with the major ones, Windows will create an entire backup inside itself because of many things that changed.
I am not a big fish in this space but I actively manage 6 dozen Windows PC's solely, I deal with those "updates" quite frequently.
But Apple also issues updates to the current version of the OS, including ones for Security.
Yeah, but your post above did not include that. You did say that Microsoft offers updates.
Microsoft does not release a new operation system every year. It's a much more reasonable system. I will skip Mac OS updates for years because of bloat and useless features they try to force.
i update each year, because it's the under-the-hood things that interest me, not (necessarily) new features. i want my macs running fast and stable... and they are currently, in catalina.
plus, some people appreciate new features (the music app, sidecar, for instance).
Nope. Catalina is great. Not a single problem on my MacBook Air or my 2018 mini.
This is why I find a version that works well and keep my machines there until a valid feature presents reason for me to to move. Those so-called under the hood improvements often include launch agents and other OS bloat that I don't want or need. People repeat that marketing phrase verbatim like it means the system is gonna run differently. I haven't seen a version of Mac OS since El Cap that actually made any of my Macs run faster or more smoothly than it previously did. They add extraneous RAM usage and applications I will never need. That's about all.
if you say so...
If people are able to quantify the supposed improvements, they wouldn’t resort to Apple’s marketing lingo. I suspect they can’t. Perceived improvements are likely placebo.
ah, 'likely' placebo. and the tech people who write up about the OSes, or those of us who find stability and speed, and are enjoying catalina... what about us? i appreciate the security, a 'clean' 64bit environment, and the replacement of itunes with music etc. and syncing my iphone in the finder!
really, use what you want. but this is the catalina forum, a place to discuss... catalina. if you're not on it, you can't have much useful to say about it...
Yeah, I have a late 2012 Mac Mini, and Catalina runs fine on it. Unfortunately, Catalina will most likely be the last Mac OS one can run on it. I am thus looking to purchase a 2018 model. But I'll miss the 2012 machine. I purchased brand new, upgraded to a 256 gig SSD and 8 gig of Ram, and it has been a reliable machine for the last 7 years.
ah, yes, the last of the upgradeable Macs.
I too have a 2012 Macbook Pro that is running Catalina and it's the last version it will run.
It's nice to have a Mac that can have its RAM, HDD, battery, optical - replaced or upgraded...
Now looking at the 2019 MBP 16".....
Apple's premature decision to drop 32-bit apps and the 5,1 Mac Pro is the main frustration in Catalina. It isn't a user-friendly update for those coming from Mojave or earlier, I'd even call it Apple's worst since Lion which dropped Rosetta support.
That being said, in terms of stability and performance, 10.15.2 seems alright. Though it could be in part because I'm running it on newer hardware (16" MacBook Pro), Catalina is like any other MacOS version in that it'll become better as it matures with 10.15.x bug-fix updates.
That being said, in terms of stability and performance, 10.15.2 seems alright. Though it could be in part because I'm running it on newer hardware (16" MacBook Pro), Catalina is like any other MacOS version in that it'll become better as it matures with 10.15.x bug-fix updates.
They did it incrementally over ten years. I find it difficult to call that premature. We all knew it was coming.
No. Vista was in an absolute league of it's own pre-service pack 1. You couldn't even transfer large amounts of data from one drive to another because of a volume copy error bug.
Catalina for the most part works fine. We have plenty of machines at work on it and my home machines are on it as well. The "Catalina is a disaster" is unfounded nonsense by people who never actually installed it. Is it perfect? No, but it's completely usable.
As for 32 bit support, needed to go. This is 100% on app developers at this point because the writing has been on the wall for 32 bit since roughly 2003 (if memory serves). A few years later when Leopard was released Carbon apps no longer got a 64 bit update. Apple then repeatedly mentioned transitioning to 64 bit throughout the years and announced last year Mojave would be the last OS to support 32 bit apps. This is no longer Apples fault.
Ditto !
Agree 100% - all my old (2012) and newer (2018) Macs all work well with Catalina.
Had to switch over to Microsoft Office 2019 for 64 bit support to work but other than that - it's a nice secure operating system....
Yes, Catalina has definitely been stable for me on both of my Macs. Of course, I did not rush and install it immediately, as I had to wait for all of my third party apps to be compatible with OS 10.15.x. That happened almost 2 weeks ago with Tech Tool Pro, and thus I started with OS 10.15.2. I also did a clean, fresh installation of OS 10.15.2 on both of my Macs.
Another pleasant thing is that Catalina apparently consumes less memory than Mojave, at least for my needs and all the apps I use.
I am also content with Catalina. I have been using macOS since Leopard and have always encountered some hiccups and minor annoyances. If it were so bad as implied here, I would not be using it. That said, I still use Windows 10 and Fedora too and still find macOS to be the more reliable and enjoyable experience.
From a performance standpoint I found Lion and Yosemite to be the worst and even those were still usable. Catalina may very well be the starting point of a new transition with the removal of 32-bit libraries and apps as well as the introduction of Catalyst and SwiftUI, both of which are not trivial. The successful rollout of APFS a few years ago was nothing to sneeze at either and this now culminated in some interesting new features.
From a performance standpoint I found Lion and Yosemite to be the worst and even those were still usable. Catalina may very well be the starting point of a new transition with the removal of 32-bit libraries and apps as well as the introduction of Catalyst and SwiftUI, both of which are not trivial. The successful rollout of APFS a few years ago was nothing to sneeze at either and this now culminated in some interesting new features.