Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Phil in ocala

Suspended
Original poster
Jul 14, 2016
728
328
macOS quality as measured by Apple’s update release rate
Friday, December 8, 2017 · 3:33 pm · 19 Comments




“There’s a lot of chatter out there that High Sierra is potentially the worst macOS release ever, in terms of bugs and broken or missing functionality,” Rob Griffiths writes for The Robservatory. “From the recent Month 13 is out of bounds log spewage problem to the root no password required issue (whoops!) to a variety of other glitches, High Sierra has presented many users, myself included, with a near-constant stream of issues.”


“But is it actually any worse than prior macOS/OS X1 releases? There’s really not a lot of information to go on, given Apple’s very-private development process and non-public bug tracker,” Griffiths writes. “However, the one data source I do have is a list of every macOS release date.”

“With 10.13.2 having just been released, I thought it might be interesting to see how quickly the third update arrived on each version of macOS. If High Sierra is worse than usual, I’d expect that the time required to reach its third update would be notably less than that of other releases,” Griffiths writes. “With only 72 days between the release of the OS and its third update, High Sierra becomes the third-most-quickly-updated macOS release ever. What makes that even worse is that the first place release is the original Mac OS X 10.0, which one would expect would receive a lot of frequent updates (and it did). And it’s third by only one day, to Mac OS X 10.8. So if you ignore the original release, High Sierra is basically tied for first in a contest that you don’t really want to win.”

Read more in the full article here.
 

EugW

macrumors G5
Jun 18, 2017
14,982
12,946
In terms of actual bugginess and real-world functionality, the worst OS X release was 10.0, not surprisingly. The second worst IMO was 10.1. I didn't really start more heavily recommending OS X until 10.3.x.

But I would agree that 10.13 has been more buggy than average. Then again, for real production machines, I never recommend upgrading until about 10.x.3 or so anyway. I never upgraded my main iMac to Sierra 10.12 until the following year. The reason I have all 5 of my in-use Macs on 10.13 is because I wanted the file compatibility. My iPhone spits out HEVC and HEIC, and Sierra and earlier don't support these files at all. If it weren't for the new file format compatibility in 10.13, I would have probably waited until about 10.13.3 or so, as usual.
 
Last edited:
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.