One Year release cycle

[MJL]

I've got software that ran under Windows 2000 and is still running under Windows 7. Developper went belly up and there is nothing similar that does what this is doing.

Let's put this in another perspective: trading is the oldest profession in the world (not the other one, it has always been: what is in it for me, what do I get for it in return?). Hence trading is deeply embedded in our psyche and plays on the fear. (Fear to miss out on something good, fear on being left behind and unable to get etc. Greed is just another form of fear.) Hence trading systems by definition do not have to change at all as long as one has a way to measure this "fear" (or "greed"). Heck, I know people who are using DOS software to trade the stock market and are using Lotus spreadsheets in addition. Got some friends still running PC's with Windows 95.

If I look at the total cost of ownership over the life of a product then Apple is clearly not the cheapest. Most definitely not (the cheapest) if one includes the cost for specialised software (if it exists for OS X , unfortunately no decent package exists).

Running Windows 7 on a Mac mini makes more sense than running OS X, it actually lowers the TCO. Still running office 2000 on Windows 7, as a stand alone machine I have no need for "collaboration" and "iCloud".

 

[ADMProducer]

I've got software that ran under Windows 2000 and is still running under Windows 7. Developper went belly up and there is nothing similar that does what this is doing.

Let's put this in another perspective: trading is the oldest profession in the world (not the other one, it has always been: what is in it for me, what do I get for it in return?). Hence trading is deeply embedded in our psyche and plays on the fear. (Fear to miss out on something good, fear on being left behind and unable to get etc. Greed is just another form of fear.) Hence trading systems by definition do not have to change at all as long as one has a way to measure this "fear" (or "greed"). Heck, I know people who are using DOS software to trade the stock market and are using Lotus spreadsheets in addition. Got some friends still running PC's with Windows 95.

If I look at the total cost of ownership over the life of a product then Apple is clearly not the cheapest. Most definitely not (the cheapest) if one includes the cost for specialised software (if it exists for OS X , unfortunately no decent package exists).

Running Windows 7 on a Mac mini makes more sense than running OS X, it actually lowers the TCO. Still running office 2000 on Windows 7, as a stand alone machine I have no need for "collaboration" and "iCloud".

Well, sir. Keep a windows machine on the side for your trading.

If the world was left to people like you, we'd still be on horseback.

 

[limo79]

So, it seems like Apple is moving towards a one year release cycle for OS X. Why are they doing this? Do they want to integrate os x and ios faster? That's my guess at least, can anyone come up with another reason?

New MacBooks with Retina displays require hi res graphics, so Apple must to adopt OS to this hardware change, so they decided a new OS X with some additional features like Safari 5.2, GateKeeper,iCloud for Safari that are that we know from DP reviews. This is also a chance to earn money. This update will cost probably 29$ like Snow Leo. But...

Developers do not stand the pace of Apple. This is a real problem. I tried to run Safari 5.2 (copied from ML DP2) under OS X Lion 10.7.3 and it is incompatible. So again we must wait for a new generation of applications compatible with ML. And I do not mean small apps but rather very complex products like Ableton, Adobe, AutoCAD and also buggy Apple Aperture etc.

This is sick because Mountain Lion looks like tuned Lion with small changes. There is no revolution inside. Is there a problem to replace old icons with the new HD icons, to add a new Safari and GateKeeper, Notifications using Combo Update? These features are not spectacular to release a new OS and sell it for low price 30$ Believe me or not but even such low price generates a big profits for Apple and it is extremely clever from marketing point of view.

Apple released some time ago Migration Assistant for OS X Leopard, but I hope that Apple gave up with idea of curious migration (double upgrade) from OS X Leopard to OS X Lion spending additional 29$ for OS X Snow Leopard required - 60$ in total. In case of migration from OS X Leopard to OS X Mountain Lion it will means (triple update) the purchase of two unnecessary OS X systems: Snow Leopard and Lion (total 90$).

Did you ever heard about Windows 7 that require buying Windows Vista? No. You can install it without any problem.

Regarding Windows: many of Microsoft Windows applications are still compatible with 11 years old Windows XP standard which is a real advantage. There is no such wide compatibility (backward and forward) in Apple world. You can use applications built for Windows 7 under Windows 8 (maybe except such like disk utilities). Compare it with Apple environment - such small well known OS X app utility like OnyX - separate versions for Leopard, Snow Leopard, Lion and Mountain Lion. Leopard is just a 5-years old OS. Happily developers are ready in this case - you can download OnyX for ML. So maybe OS X and software for Macs are cheaper, but you must to buy a new versions very often and loose nerves.

I realize that hardware changes each year but 2-3 years OS X release cycle is more comfortable for software developers and for customers situation is more stable also. Minor changes like Safari 5.2, Notifications, GateKeeper etc in ML shall be released in Combo Update form to Lion. After 2-3 years we can expect more significant changes i.e. HFS+ with sparse file support and without ancient PowerPC 16-bit support or totally new file system etc.