 |
| Source: Apple |
News and analysis of Apple’s new release of OS X — version 10.6, dubbed “Snow Leopard” — have already begun making the rounds this week. With the update going on sale today, you’re certain to have seen plenty of reports assessing whether it’s worth it, whether it’s a must-have update, whether it’s an “important” milestone for the Apple Mac operating system.
But what precious few news outlets have spent much time pondering is that the new OS is smaller and faster than before.
Take a second to think about this.
With each subsequent release of OS X, the operating system’s performance has gotten better and better while hardware requirements have barely moved. Actually, until Snow Leopard’s debut, you could continue running the latest version of the operating system on hardware that existed even before OS X itself and still be realizing performance improvements.
And today, users may notice that with Snow Leopard, the operating system’s footprint on their hard drive has also begun decreasing. That’s right: OS X 10.6 takes up less space than 10.5 — while being faster and introducing new features.
Oh, yeah: Snow Leopard retails for $29.
Now Apple’s just showing off.
But the company’s superior approach to the OS can’t be denied. We have another example of how Apple’s is unique in the realm of mainstream consumer operating systems: OS X gets faster and more powerful each time without significantly upping its hardware requirements.
In the age of Windows Vista, this seems incredible.
But it’s not. It’s just great software engineering. The dominance of Windows has gotten us accustomed to thinking very differently about how an OS should perform, and how much it should ask of its user. In fact, the entire industry now counts on users to upgrade their systems to be able to handle the newest operating system.
Many of the fortunes of the largest companies in the space are now tied to the Windows release cycle, with everyone from Intel to Dell awaiting the launch of Windows 7 in October.
It’s a different matter for Mac users, since Apple’s approach to OS X has some potent implications for what drives new Mac purchases.
Viewed through the prism of Windows, it might seem baffling that new Mac purchases aren’t tied to the release of a new OS. Instead, Mac users find other reasons to buy, with at least one reason being because Apple’s already peerless hardware design improves in each iteration. Maybe they want to run the latest version of Photoshop. Whatever the reason, Mac users only upgrade because they want to — not because the operating system’s growing heft makes it a necessity.
No wonder these are some of the most loyal customers in any industry.
Not everyone missed out on noting Apple’s continued successes in whittling down OS X’s footprint while speeding it up: Our own Sean Michael Kerner touched on the subject in his recent piece on Snow Leopard; as did New York Times tech columnist David Pogue in his review of the new OS. Brian Caulfield at Forbes.com devoted an entire column to it.
And rightly so — feats like this, I believe, need to be highlighted.
This is the way that system software should be architected. Each successive release of OS X has gotten lighter and more efficient. It hasn’t introduced bloat that forces users to upgrade their systems. Quite the opposite: It’s gotten leaner while getting more powerful.
It’s not clear that Microsoft will ever feel compelled to work the same way. It’s got too much riding on it now that the entire PC ecosystem seems to be counting on Windows 7 to drive new a new crop of PC sales.
That’s a pity for the consumer, who shouldn’t be required to shell out for new hardware just to run the newest system software. It’s all the more troubling when the new system software is released chiefly to fix problems with previous system software (think back to Vista’s marketing as being a more secure replacement for Windows XP; now consider Windows 7’s positioning as a faster, less cumbersome Vista. See a pattern here?)
Microsoft’s clearly not the only major software developer wrestling with these issues. (I mentioned Adobe a moment ago: Photoshop’s a wonderful application, true, but with each upgrade it also generally manages to re-establish itself as a system-dominating resource hog.)
Among the top software developers, who else has a reputation for successive, major releases that work better and run faster without raising platform requirements?
Think about this and let me know. I bet you’ll find it’s a pretty short list.
Apple OS X Snow Leopard
Source: Apple
News and analysis of Apple’s new release of OS X — version 10.6, dubbed “Snow Leopard” — have already begun making the rounds this week. With the update going on sale today, you’re certain to have seen plenty of reports assessing whether it’s worth it, whether it’s a must-have update, whether it’s an “important” milestone for the Apple Mac operating system.
But what precious few news outlets have spent much time pondering is that the new OS is smaller and faster than before.
Take a second to think about this.
With each subsequent release of OS X, the operating system’s performance has gotten better and better while hardware requirements have barely moved. Actually, until Snow Leopard’s debut, you could continue running the latest version of the operating system on hardware that existed even before OS X itself and still be realizing performance improvements.
And today, users may notice that with Snow Leopard, the operating system’s footprint on their hard drive has also begun decreasing. That’s right: OS X 10.6 takes up less space than 10.5 — while being faster and introducing new features.
Oh, yeah: Snow Leopard retails for $29.
Now Apple’s just showing off.
But the company’s superior approach to the OS can’t be denied. We have another example of how Apple’s is unique in the realm of mainstream consumer operating systems: OS X gets faster and more powerful each time without significantly upping its hardware requirements.
In the age of Windows Vista, this seems incredible.
But it’s not. It’s just great software engineering. The dominance of Windows has gotten us accustomed to thinking very differently about how an OS should perform, and how much it should ask of its user. In fact, the entire industry now counts on users to upgrade their systems to be able to handle the newest operating system.
Many of the fortunes of the largest companies in the space are now tied to the Windows release cycle, with everyone from Intel to Dell awaiting the launch of Windows 7 in October.
It’s a different matter for Mac users, since Apple’s approach to OS X has some potent implications for what drives new Mac purchases.
Viewed through the prism of Windows, it might seem baffling that new Mac purchases aren’t tied to the release of a new OS. Instead, Mac users find other reasons to buy, with at least one reason being because Apple’s already peerless hardware design improves in each iteration. Maybe they want to run the latest version of Photoshop. Whatever the reason, Mac users only upgrade because they want to — not because the operating system’s growing heft makes it a necessity.
No wonder these are some of the most loyal customers in any industry.
Not everyone missed out on noting Apple’s continued successes in whittling down OS X’s footprint while speeding it up: Our own Sean Michael Kerner touched on the subject in his recent piece on Snow Leopard; as did New York Times tech columnist David Pogue in his review of the new OS. Brian Caulfield at Forbes.com devoted an entire column to it.
And rightly so — feats like this, I believe, need to be highlighted.
This is the way that system software should be architected. Each successive release of OS X has gotten lighter and more efficient. It hasn’t introduced bloat that forces users to upgrade their systems. Quite the opposite: It’s gotten leaner while getting more powerful.
It’s not clear that Microsoft will ever feel compelled to work the same way. It’s got too much riding on it now that the entire PC ecosystem seems to be counting on Windows 7 to drive new a new crop of PC sales.
That’s a pity for the consumer, who shouldn’t be required to shell out for new hardware just to run the newest system software. It’s all the more troubling when the new system software is released chiefly to fix problems with previous system software (think back to Vista’s marketing as being a more secure replacement for Windows XP; now consider Windows 7’s positioning as a faster, less cumbersome Vista. See a pattern here?)
Microsoft’s clearly not the only major software developer wrestling with these issues. (I mentioned Adobe a moment ago: Photoshop’s a wonderful application, true, but with each upgrade it also generally manages to re-establish itself as a system-dominating resource hog.)
Among the top software developers, who else has a reputation for successive, major releases that work better and run faster without raising platform requirements?
Think about this and let me know. I bet you’ll find it’s a pretty short list. source >>
