Hacker News Reader

Comment by mbernstein | Hacker News Reader

I hope that's sarcasm. There have been problems with macOS (OS X at the time) all the way back to public beta including sluggishness pre-Intel transition.

It was (and still is) a great OS to use - but to pretend that pre 2007 existed a time where everything was perfect and no problems existed is absurd.

View on HN

I agree, although my anecdotal experience after a decade of using Macs full time (and a few years part time before that) is that I've seen a lot more bugs and problems since Apple switched to a yearly release cycle.

Yosemite was by far the worst macOS version I've ever used. I'm pretty happy with El Capitan though and I won't upgrade until I really need to.

  > lot more bugs and problems since Apple switched to a yearly
  > release cycle.

The theory that I subscribe to, is that now there is less time for the version to mature. Previously a version of OS X lasted long enough for the bugs to be ironed out and people usually remember the last version they have worked with, not the 10.XX.0 release.

I've stopped upgrading to major macOS versions until at least 6 months have passed if not 1 year (when the following major version is released).

This has worked more or less ok for me with the major exception of Yosemite. Snow Leopard and Mountain Lion were the most stable and polished versions I've used.

I think this is now the safest way to proceed. When I used Windows I wouldn't upgrade to the new version until the first or second service package.

> I've stopped upgrading to major macOS versions until at least 6 months have passed if not 1 year (when the following major version is released).

Does the old stable still get equal security fixes?

   > I hope that's sarcasm.

It is. ("Yeah" at the beginning of my comment is pretty much the same as /s at the end of others :) )

Reply on news.ycombinator.com