Noted cogitator Jason Kottke has an interesting thought on the experience of getting fully up to speed with brand-new Apple hardware and software. Basically, things have gotten so good that, barring minor speed improvements, you can’t tell any difference between new and old. He terms it “The Apple Upgrade Problem”:
“Which is where the potential difficulty for Apple comes in. From a superficial perspective, my old MBP and new MBP felt exactly the same…same OS, same desktop wallpaper, same Dock, all my same files in their same folders, etc. Same deal with the iPhone except moreso…the iPhone is almost entirely software and that was nearly identical. And re: Snow Leopard, I haven’t noticed any changes at all aside from the aforementioned absent plug-ins.”
Jason’s on to something interesting here. If you are a frequent Apple upgrader, you get far less of a thrill than if you wait a long time between devices. Consider the negligible differences between last year’s MacBook Pros and this year’s (unless you love battery life, FireWire, and SD cards, there’s not much to discuss). Or between the first video-capable iPod nanos and the current models (styling and form factor tell the whole story). And that’s without mentioning that it’s literally impossible to tell a 16-gig iPhone 3G apart from a 3GS.
So what does this mean?
For most people, very little. Unless you’re buying replacement hardware on an annual or at most biannual basis, you won’t have these kinds of difficulties. I, for one, had an iPod from 2004 that lasted me until I bought a green nano last year — huge leap forward. My PowerBook G4 stuck it out for five-and-a-half years before my beloved unibody MacBook arrived. And I won’t even go into just how much better the iPhone 3GS is than the BlackBerry Pearl it replaced.
For some people, Apple’s current predictability is a major boon. For corporate purchasers for example, the ability to requisition multiple models of a computer and not make it clear in the design who has the nicest or newest machine is a big deal for IT. That way I don’t get jealous when my 2008 unibody MacBook starts to age unfavorably against what I can only presume will be a 2010 unibody MacBook Pro. That’s true on iPhones, too, where executives who adopted a 3G last year don’t look hopelessly out of date around their 3GS-packing peers.
Honestly, the more I think about it, the very few people who are negatively affected by stuff like this are Apple’s most diehard fans — creative professionals who rely on new Mac hardware and software to help them do great work. The same people, it should be noted, who carried Apple through its darkest days. I’m less concerned on the hardware front (Apple always sticks with a design for a few years to avoid costs and focus on bigger leaps forward), but in software, it is a niggling question. And if the Mac isn’t providing creative pros with interesting novelty and inspiration, Apple isn’t executing on the fullness of its mission — where’s the creativity?
Now, it’s clear that Snow Leopard was a deliberate pause in the OS X development cycle to make sure that everything just worked a whole lot better. Other than a few front-stage changes, it was meant to invisibly make your existing Mac more stable and speedy. The question remains just how Apple will evolve OS X next. There are a lot fewer gaps than there used to be — and so much interesting work to be done in mobile and other touch interfaces.
What do you think — is there interesting work to be done on OS X as we know it? Or does Snow Leopard signal an end to innovation in conventional desktop operating systems?
