Welcome to the Land of OS; Now Go Find Your Compass
Trite car metaphors are the scourge of the computer industry, so when Apple discusses its “road map” for the Mac operating system, I’m on my guard. Like any red-blooded American man, I don’t like to ask for directions. Anyway, could this really be so complicated to require a map? I’m afraid so. But take heart--a map-reading course follows.
Until recently, Apple was working toward two major revisions of the Mac OS, designed to bury Windows with beauty, features and ease of use. Apple code-named those revisions Copland and Gershwin, in keeping with its obscure but endearingly artistic bent. (Microsoft has used city code names, such as Chicago and Cairo, for OS upgrades, perhaps designating future colonies of Redmond, Wash.).
But while Copland and Gershwin proceeded at the speed of glaciers, Apple released smaller changes--from QuickTime to Stickies--constantly. We’ve seen five OSs this year already.
In a rare concession to reality (and to abandon the Copland/Gershwin strategy without admitting a monumental failure), Apple recently announced a new strategy of incremental system roll-outs, adding significant new features twice yearly. With luck, this will inject coherence and predictability into a sometimes perverse process.
But should you upgrade your OS each time? Here are some guidelines for answering that question:
* Deconstruct version numbers. As software numbering schemes rank among the more daunting challenges of modern living, here’s how to interpret them: Changes of Copland-esque magnitude--a shift in overall approach or addition of fundamental new services--track to the first number; System 7 becomes System 8.
Incorporation of major features that were originally offered separately are normally noted in the second number. System 7.6, to be released early next year, brings OpenDoc and Cyberdog into the fold.
Bug fixes, performance enhancements and minor features tend to be reflected in the third number; System 7.5.5 (current now), up from 7.5.3. (7.5.4 went to developers only.)
* Consider your cost for upgrading. Today, system upgrades are free (https://www.support.apple.com/). This will change soon, Apple says, but the relatively small charge will be less troubling than the tax on your computing resources, if not your sanity.
On an old machine, a modern OS version may run more slowly because it relies on the faster processors of today’s Macs. Many users hated System 7 when it came out years ago; it slowed their machines to a crawl. Then again, if you need, say, file sharing, you’re out of luck with System 6.
In general, upgrade when you suffer from the specific bug fixed in the new OS, because every system version introduces new complexities and conflicts. As a hedge against such headaches, wait one month after a new release, then check with Apple or https://www.macworld.com for bug reports.
* Go for features you need. If your computing consists of word processing, spreadsheets and games, sit tight. Many clever technologies, such as AppleScript and QuickDraw GX, are irrelevant to people with modest needs.
But go for a new OS version if it offers at least two new features that would help you regularly. Macintosh Easy Open (for finding an application to open a foreign file) and Find File (a superb search engine) are great reasons to move to version 7.5.
Incremental releases are fine, but to stay competitive Apple desperately needs the major advantages promised by Copland and Gershwin: preemptive multitasking, to run two or more programs simultaneously without bogging down; memory protection, to dramatically reduce system crashes; and full support for multiple central processors, to allow the OS and all programs to take advantage of multiprocessing, rather than just specially re-reworked applications.
Such improvements are a long way off. Recently, though, a company called Be created a buzz by introducing a new OS that works on the Mac and offers most of the Copland/Gershwin improvements.
Be suffers, unfortunately, from crippling drawbacks: no programs, no compatibility with Mac programs and no support for QuickTime, among other key technologies. So don’t expect it to replace the Mac OS. Still, Apple says it may adopt parts of the Be OS to more quickly modernize the Mac OS.
And why not? I was already starting to get bored with incipient orderliness in Apple’s system strategy.
