Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #67754 > unrolled thread

Has Apple's software quality declined?

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system

Contents

  Has Apple's software quality declined? nmassello@yahoo.com (Neill Massello) - 2014-12-22 12:24 -0700
    Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-12-22 15:11 -0500
    Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-22 20:12 +0000
      Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-12-22 16:04 -0500
        Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-22 22:50 +0000
          Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-12-22 19:07 -0500
            Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-23 04:49 +0000
          Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-12-22 22:51 -0500
            Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-23 04:46 +0000
              Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-12-23 00:43 -0500
                Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-23 14:39 +0000
            Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2014-12-26 19:39 -0500
              Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-27 01:44 +0000
          Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? me@home.spamsucks.ca (Király) - 2014-12-23 04:37 +0000
            Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-12-25 00:03 +0000
          Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> - 2014-12-23 17:46 -0800
            Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net> - 2014-12-24 04:36 +0000
            Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-24 14:39 +0000
            Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2014-12-24 13:56 -0800
              Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-24 22:09 +0000
                Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-12-24 18:40 -0500
                  Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-25 15:09 +0000
                    Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-12-25 09:33 -0700
                      Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-25 16:38 +0000
                        Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-12-25 09:46 -0700
              Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? bob <rcp27g@gmail.com> - 2014-12-28 09:19 +0000
                Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2014-12-29 02:42 +1300
                  Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? android <here@there.was> - 2014-12-28 15:35 +0100
                    Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2014-12-29 10:57 +1300
                  Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> - 2014-12-28 07:43 -0800
                  Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-12-28 08:49 -0700
                    Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> - 2014-12-28 11:26 -0800
                      Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-28 20:11 +0000
                    Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-12-28 19:35 +0000
                      Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2014-12-28 13:05 -0700
                    Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2014-12-29 10:57 +1300
                      Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-12-28 17:23 -0500
                    Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2014-12-29 22:59 -0500
                      Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-12-30 09:42 +0000
                        Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? android <here@there.was> - 2014-12-30 12:44 +0100
                        Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2014-12-30 14:09 -0500
                          Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? android <here@there.was> - 2014-12-30 20:51 +0100
                  Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-12-28 17:55 -0500
                Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2014-12-30 13:03 -0800
                  Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net> - 2014-12-30 22:20 +0000
                    Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> - 2014-12-31 20:42 -0800
                  Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-12-31 01:16 +0000
                  Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? erilar <drache@chibardun.net.invalid> - 2014-12-31 15:33 -0600
        Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-12-25 00:01 +0000
          Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-12-25 11:34 -0500
            Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-12-25 21:59 +0000
              Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-25 17:07 -0500
              Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-25 22:38 +0000
                Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-12-26 09:05 -0500
                  Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-26 17:01 +0000
                    Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-12-26 15:32 -0500
                      Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net> - 2014-12-26 21:16 +0000
                        Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-26 17:33 -0500
                          Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net> - 2014-12-26 23:41 +0000
                            Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-26 22:48 -0500
                          Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> - 2014-12-26 23:22 -0800
                            Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-27 04:26 -0500
                            Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-27 14:45 +0000
      Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> - 2014-12-23 19:19 -0800
        Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net> - 2014-12-24 04:34 +0000
          Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-23 23:46 -0500
            Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net> - 2014-12-24 05:22 +0000
              Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-12-24 07:55 -0500
                Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net> - 2014-12-24 16:20 +0000
          Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-12-25 00:06 +0000
        Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-24 14:46 +0000
          Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? billy@MIX.COM - 2014-12-24 23:19 +0000
            Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-12-25 00:09 +0000
            Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-25 03:04 +0000
              Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> - 2014-12-25 09:20 -0800
                Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-12-25 17:29 +0000
    Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> - 2014-12-22 23:44 -0800
    Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2014-12-24 00:42 -0800
      Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-12-24 03:58 -0500
        Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2014-12-24 13:52 -0800
      Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-12-25 00:11 +0000
    Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-12-25 00:00 +0000
    Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-12-25 18:41 +0100
      Re: Has Apple's software quality declined? Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-12-26 14:00 +1300

Page 1 of 5  [1] 2 3 4 5  Next page →

#67754 — Has Apple's software quality declined?

Anthony Wing Kosner has a pretty good article at Forbes about problems
with Apple's recent OS releases. 

<http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonykosner/2014/12/22/declining-apple-software-quality-imperils-future-growth-and-retention/>

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#67755

On 2014.12.22 14:24 , Neill Massello wrote:
> Anthony Wing Kosner has a pretty good article at Forbes about problems
> with Apple's recent OS releases.
>
> <http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonykosner/2014/12/22/declining-apple-software-quality-imperils-future-growth-and-retention/>

Good article (excusing the thinking system 1 and 2 analogies that 
weren't needed).

-- 
<< Among Broad Outlines, conception is far more pleasurable
    than “carrying [the children] to fruition.”
    Sadly, “there’s a high infant mortality rate among
    Broad Outlines—they often fall prey to Nonstarters.” >>
                       "Bestiary of Intelligence Writing" - CIA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#67756

On 2014-12-22, Neill Massello <nmassello@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Anthony Wing Kosner has a pretty good article at Forbes about problems
> with Apple's recent OS releases. 
>
><http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonykosner/2014/12/22/declining-apple-software-quality-imperils-future-growth-and-retention/>

Where's the data to back up the assertion that quality is actually
declining as opposed to some blogger simply having selective / faulty
memory? 

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#67757

On 2014.12.22 15:12 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> On 2014-12-22, Neill Massello <nmassello@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Anthony Wing Kosner has a pretty good article at Forbes about problems
>> with Apple's recent OS releases.
>>
>> <http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonykosner/2014/12/22/declining-apple-software-quality-imperils-future-growth-and-retention/>
>
> Where's the data to back up the assertion that quality is actually
> declining as opposed to some blogger simply having selective / faulty
> memory?

Faulty memory?  Have you forgotten:
	8.0   WiFi issues.
	8.0.1 WiFi fix that made things much, much worse.

He references several bloggers (nice fat happy Apple fans, all) who 
point out a variety of things.  This includes an iOS developer who is 
exposed to it on the front lines.  And MaxFan Gruber of Daring Fireball 
replying to him:

http://daringfireball.net/linked/2014/10/01/it-just-works

It's not surprising:  higher complexity (integration across devices and 
cloud, with more and more features) coupled to faster release cycles, 
and in the case of iOS coupled to hard deadline hardware cycles is bound 
to blow buggy code to the surface.

-- 
<< Among Broad Outlines, conception is far more pleasurable
    than “carrying [the children] to fruition.”
    Sadly, “there’s a high infant mortality rate among
    Broad Outlines—they often fall prey to Nonstarters.” >>
                       "Bestiary of Intelligence Writing" - CIA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#67760

On 2014-12-22, Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
> On 2014.12.22 15:12 , Jolly Roger wrote:
>> On 2014-12-22, Neill Massello <nmassello@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Anthony Wing Kosner has a pretty good article at Forbes about problems
>>> with Apple's recent OS releases.
>>>
>>> <http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonykosner/2014/12/22/declining-apple-software-quality-imperils-future-growth-and-retention/>
>>
>> Where's the data to back up the assertion that quality is actually
>> declining as opposed to some blogger simply having selective / faulty
>> memory?
>
> Faulty memory?  Have you forgotten:
> 	8.0   WiFi issues.
> 	8.0.1 WiFi fix that made things much, much worse.

You're conveniently ignoring all the other major snafus that have come
and gone in the past. Or have have you forgotten all the issues that
came before those? The faulty memory has to do with forgetting all the
other bugs that have been present in all the other software updates
going all the way back to Classic Mac OS. Have you gone back and
quantified all of those, or do you contend those never happened at all? 

In order for there to be a legitimate *decline* in quality, there needs
to be an established *trend* showing that quality was substantially
*better* in the past. I've been around Apple products long enough to
recall there being various major problems with various Apple products
going pretty far back.  So again, where is the data showing that there
is an actual decline in quality as opposed to someone having selective
memory?

Absent of that, what I hear is people saying they wish these issues
wouldn't happen at all, which is a pipe dream. Shit happens. No software
is without bugs, and *most* are avoidable with enough time and money.
That's just the way it is.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#67762

On 2014.12.22 17:50 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> On 2014-12-22, Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>> On 2014.12.22 15:12 , Jolly Roger wrote:
>>> On 2014-12-22, Neill Massello <nmassello@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> Anthony Wing Kosner has a pretty good article at Forbes about problems
>>>> with Apple's recent OS releases.
>>>>
>>>> <http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonykosner/2014/12/22/declining-apple-software-quality-imperils-future-growth-and-retention/>
>>>
>>> Where's the data to back up the assertion that quality is actually
>>> declining as opposed to some blogger simply having selective / faulty
>>> memory?
>>
>> Faulty memory?  Have you forgotten:
>> 	8.0   WiFi issues.
>> 	8.0.1 WiFi fix that made things much, much worse.
>
> You're conveniently ignoring all the other major snafus that have come
> and gone in the past. Or have have you forgotten all the issues that
> came before those? The faulty memory has to do with forgetting all the
> other bugs that have been present in all the other software updates
> going all the way back to Classic Mac OS. Have you gone back and
> quantified all of those, or do you contend those never happened at all?

As usual you find a convenient way to say it ain't so.  Whatever floats 
your fleet.

>
> In order for there to be a legitimate *decline* in quality, there needs
> to be an established *trend* showing that quality was substantially
> *better* in the past. I've been around Apple products long enough to
> recall there being various major problems with various Apple products
> going pretty far back.  So again, where is the data showing that there
> is an actual decline in quality as opposed to someone having selective
> memory?

The unavoidable facts are that Apple have:

- limited software resources (engineers)[1]
- higher complexity
- greater interoperability between devices
- drive to release major iOS with a new hardware release
- faster paced releases

This has the referenced commentators (article) stating what they believe 
is happening wrt the bugs they are seeing.


 >
 > Absent of that, what I hear is people saying they wish these issues
 > wouldn't happen at all, which is a pipe dream. Shit happens. No software
 > is without bugs, and *most* are avoidable with enough time and money.
 > That's just the way it is.

Never said different.  OTHO, per the article, developers are seeing a 
worsening of bugs (frequency, impact).

-- 
<< Among Broad Outlines, conception is far more pleasurable
    than “carrying [the children] to fruition.”
    Sadly, “there’s a high infant mortality rate among
    Broad Outlines—they often fall prey to Nonstarters.” >>
                       "Bestiary of Intelligence Writing" - CIA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#67770

On 2014-12-23, Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
> On 2014.12.22 17:50 , Jolly Roger wrote:
>> On 2014-12-22, Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>>> On 2014.12.22 15:12 , Jolly Roger wrote:
>>>> On 2014-12-22, Neill Massello <nmassello@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>> Anthony Wing Kosner has a pretty good article at Forbes about problems
>>>>> with Apple's recent OS releases.
>>>>>
>>>>> <http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonykosner/2014/12/22/declining-apple-software-quality-imperils-future-growth-and-retention/>
>>>>
>>>> Where's the data to back up the assertion that quality is actually
>>>> declining as opposed to some blogger simply having selective / faulty
>>>> memory?
>>>
>>> Faulty memory?  Have you forgotten:
>>> 	8.0   WiFi issues.
>>> 	8.0.1 WiFi fix that made things much, much worse.
>>
>> You're conveniently ignoring all the other major snafus that have come
>> and gone in the past. Or have have you forgotten all the issues that
>> came before those? The faulty memory has to do with forgetting all the
>> other bugs that have been present in all the other software updates
>> going all the way back to Classic Mac OS. Have you gone back and
>> quantified all of those, or do you contend those never happened at all?
>
> As usual you find a convenient way to say it ain't so.  Whatever floats 
> your fleet.

Wrong. What I'm saying is the author of the article has not proven his
assertion that quality is declining. And neither have you.

> > Absent of that, what I hear is people saying they wish these issues
> > wouldn't happen at all, which is a pipe dream. Shit happens. No software
> > is without bugs, and *most* are avoidable with enough time and money.
> > That's just the way it is.
>
> Never said different.  OTHO, per the article, developers are seeing a 
> worsening of bugs (frequency, impact).

Which could very well be selective / short memory on the part of
developers. All any of you who say there is a decline have to do is show
some evidence of a trend and I'll be perfectly happy to capitulate.
Until then, you, and the author of the article, are blowing hot air.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#67767

On 14-12-22 17:50, Jolly Roger wrote:

> You're conveniently ignoring all <blind love for anything Apple omitted >


Irrespective of whether the actual number of serous problems is on the
increase or not, it matters more that the press is starting to write
about them because that hurts Apple's image of "extra price is worth it
because of better quality"


Automatically connecting to a Wi-Fi when you open the laptop is
something that worked fine.... until Yosemite. This isn't a bug in a new
feature, this is bad quality control over existing software which
obvously got changed and not properly tested.

Releasing that 8.01 which caused many phones to stop working as phones
was another example of something likely rushed without proper testing.

Looks like the corporate disease of marketing controlling engineering.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#67769

On 2014-12-23, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> On 14-12-22 17:50, Jolly Roger wrote:
>
>> You're conveniently ignoring all <blind love for anything Apple omitted >
>
> Irrespective of whether the actual number of serous problems is on the
> increase or not

Fail. The entire point of this thread and the article quoted is that
there is an decrease in quality. You don't get to move the goal post
now. A decrease in quality has not been established. What you call
"blind love for anything Apple", I call simple logical analysis of
facts.  Again, I have yet to see anyone show proof that there is a
decrease in quality. Nothing you can say short of providing evidence of
a decline will change this fact.

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#67773

On 14-12-22 23:46, Jolly Roger wrote:
> Fail. The entire point of this thread and the article quoted is that
> there is an decrease in quality. 


No, the entire point is *perceived* decrease in quality which may lower
Apple sales in future. And perceptions are driven and amplified by how
the media portrays the issue.

Go back to the MAC vs PC ads. Why were they succesfull ? because the
media had harped on poor Windows quality, number of viruses etc, so
Apple could hit on that raw nerve.

Reverse the situation where the media talk about the software problems
for IOS and OS-X, and Apple starts to have much poorer image.

And in marketing, especially of premium products, image is everything.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#67776

On 2014-12-23, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> On 14-12-22 23:46, Jolly Roger wrote:
>> Fail. The entire point of this thread and the article quoted is that
>> there is an decrease in quality. 
>
> No, the entire point is *perceived* decrease in quality which may lower
> Apple sales in future. And perceptions are driven and amplified by how
> the media portrays the issue.
>
> Go back to the MAC vs PC ads. Why were they succesfull ? because the
> media had harped on poor Windows quality, number of viruses etc, so
> Apple could hit on that raw nerve.
>
> Reverse the situation where the media talk about the software problems
> for IOS and OS-X, and Apple starts to have much poorer image.
>
> And in marketing, especially of premium products, image is everything.

Marketing ain't everything. For a whole lot of us, actual results
matter. : )

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#67876

In article <5498e6d0$0$32289$c3e8da3$cc4fe22d@news.astraweb.com>,
 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> Irrespective of whether the actual number of serous problems is on the
> increase or not, it matters more that the press is starting to write
> about them because that hurts Apple's image of "extra price is worth it
> because of better quality"

A Forbes "contributor" hardly qualifies as "the press."

-- 
D.F. Manno | dfmanno@mail.com
GOP delenda est!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#67882

On 2014-12-27, D.F. Manno <dfmanno@mail.com> wrote:
> In article <5498e6d0$0$32289$c3e8da3$cc4fe22d@news.astraweb.com>,
>  JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
>
>> Irrespective of whether the actual number of serous problems is on the
>> increase or not, it matters more that the press is starting to write
>> about them because that hurts Apple's image of "extra price is worth it
>> because of better quality"
>
> A Forbes "contributor" hardly qualifies as "the press."

Apparently for some fools, anyone with a web site is "the press".

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#67768

Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> So again, where is the data showing that there is an actual decline in 
> quality as opposed to someone having selective memory?

iMovie comes to mind. It was an excellent program up to and including 
version 6. All versions after that have been a big bag of hurt.

OS X itself took a big nose dive between 10.6 and 10.7, but it has been 
slowly inching itself back up since then. With the exception of 
Preview's god-awful annotation capabilities in 10.10 (what *were* they 
thinking), I quite like the latest OS X.

-- 
K.

Lang may your lum reek.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#67810

Okay, so one time? In band camp? Király <me@home.spamsucks.ca> was all, like:
> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>> So again, where is the data showing that there is an actual decline in 
>> quality as opposed to someone having selective memory?

> iMovie comes to mind. It was an excellent program up to and including 
> version 6. All versions after that have been a big bag of hurt.

According to whom? I know people who use the current version of iMovie
every single day. I do not hear them complaining about it.


-- 
'Why don't I feel angry?' GLANDS, said Death shortly. ADRENALIN AND SO
FORTH. AND EMOTIONS. YOU DON'T HAVE THEM. ALL YOU HAVE NOW IS THOUGHT.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#67782

In article <cfrlhpFpl8fU2@mid.individual.net>,
 Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> On 2014-12-22, Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
> > On 2014.12.22 15:12 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> >> On 2014-12-22, Neill Massello <nmassello@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>> Anthony Wing Kosner has a pretty good article at Forbes about problems
> >>> with Apple's recent OS releases.
> >>>
> >>> <http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonykosner/2014/12/22/declining-apple-soft
> >>> ware-quality-imperils-future-growth-and-retention/>
> >>
> >> Where's the data to back up the assertion that quality is actually
> >> declining as opposed to some blogger simply having selective / faulty
> >> memory?
> >
> > Faulty memory?  Have you forgotten:
> > 	8.0   WiFi issues.
> > 	8.0.1 WiFi fix that made things much, much worse.
> 
> You're conveniently ignoring all the other major snafus that have come
> and gone in the past. Or have have you forgotten all the issues that
> came before those? The faulty memory has to do with forgetting all the
> other bugs that have been present in all the other software updates
> going all the way back to Classic Mac OS. Have you gone back and
> quantified all of those, or do you contend those never happened at all? 
> 
> In order for there to be a legitimate *decline* in quality, there needs
> to be an established *trend* showing that quality was substantially
> *better* in the past. I've been around Apple products long enough to
> recall there being various major problems with various Apple products
> going pretty far back.  So again, where is the data showing that there
> is an actual decline in quality as opposed to someone having selective
> memory?
> 
> Absent of that, what I hear is people saying they wish these issues
> wouldn't happen at all, which is a pipe dream. Shit happens. No software
> is without bugs, and *most* are avoidable with enough time and money.
> That's just the way it is.

From the SQA perspective, the only reasonable "decline in quality" would 
be something that's measurable -- be that bugs closed, bugs reported,  
etc.

Without metrics (which I'm sure Apple won't ever provide), any articles 
on trends and decline are just opinions.  And as JR says, most people 
haven't been around Macs long enough (e.g since MacOS X) to form 
anything but "I remember this one time" recollections.

Now if it were Linus talking about the Linux code base, that'd be a 
different story.  We can all look at the code base and bug database and 
see what's being worked on and what's been closed.

-- 
DeeDee, don't press that button!  DeeDee!  NO!  Dee...
[I filter all Goggle Groups posts, so any reply may be automatically ignored]

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#67788

On Tue, 23 Dec 2014 17:46:35 -0800, Michael Vilain wrote:


> Now if it were Linus talking about the Linux code base, that'd be a
> different story.  We can all look at the code base and bug database and
> see what's being worked on and what's been closed.

But Linux only does the kernel.  All the other distros throw in all their 
own unique spin!  The linux kernel is really always stable, but the 
distros are the ones that sometimes are flaky!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#67799

On 2014-12-24, Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> wrote:
> In article <cfrlhpFpl8fU2@mid.individual.net>,
>  Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2014-12-22, Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>> > On 2014.12.22 15:12 , Jolly Roger wrote:
>> >> On 2014-12-22, Neill Massello <nmassello@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >>> Anthony Wing Kosner has a pretty good article at Forbes about problems
>> >>> with Apple's recent OS releases.
>> >>>
>> >>> <http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonykosner/2014/12/22/declining-apple-soft
>> >>> ware-quality-imperils-future-growth-and-retention/>
>> >>
>> >> Where's the data to back up the assertion that quality is actually
>> >> declining as opposed to some blogger simply having selective / faulty
>> >> memory?
>> >
>> > Faulty memory?  Have you forgotten:
>> > 	8.0   WiFi issues.
>> > 	8.0.1 WiFi fix that made things much, much worse.
>> 
>> You're conveniently ignoring all the other major snafus that have come
>> and gone in the past. Or have have you forgotten all the issues that
>> came before those? The faulty memory has to do with forgetting all the
>> other bugs that have been present in all the other software updates
>> going all the way back to Classic Mac OS. Have you gone back and
>> quantified all of those, or do you contend those never happened at all? 
>> 
>> In order for there to be a legitimate *decline* in quality, there needs
>> to be an established *trend* showing that quality was substantially
>> *better* in the past. I've been around Apple products long enough to
>> recall there being various major problems with various Apple products
>> going pretty far back.  So again, where is the data showing that there
>> is an actual decline in quality as opposed to someone having selective
>> memory?
>> 
>> Absent of that, what I hear is people saying they wish these issues
>> wouldn't happen at all, which is a pipe dream. Shit happens. No software
>> is without bugs, and *most* are avoidable with enough time and money.
>> That's just the way it is.
>
> From the SQA perspective, the only reasonable "decline in quality" would 
> be something that's measurable -- be that bugs closed, bugs reported,  
> etc.
>
> Without metrics (which I'm sure Apple won't ever provide), any articles 
> on trends and decline are just opinions.  And as JR says, most people 
> haven't been around Macs long enough (e.g since MacOS X) to form 
> anything but "I remember this one time" recollections.
>
> Now if it were Linus talking about the Linux code base, that'd be a 
> different story.  We can all look at the code base and bug database and 
> see what's being worked on and what's been closed.

Thank you, Michael. It's refreshing to see there are others here that
understand how the real world works. : )

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#67804

On 2014-12-24 01:46:35 +0000, Michael Vilain said:

> And as JR says, most people haven't been around Macs long enough (e.g 
> since MacOS X) to form anything but "I remember this one time" 
> recollections.

I'm not sure that we can just throw out the experiences of the what, 
tens of millions of Apple users who have been around since the Apple II 
days, into the Classic Mac OS days, and now through the OS X days.

Apple's software is increasingly buggy as time goes on.  10.4 was a 
breath of fresh air because lots of bugs were *fixed* in 10.4 that had 
been introduced during the previous releases of OS X (including 
Rhapsody and through 10.3).

These days it appears that fixing bugs has taken a back seat to other 
pressing issues, like makind sure I can tweet crap right from the menu 
bar.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#67805

On 2014-12-24, Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On 2014-12-24 01:46:35 +0000, Michael Vilain said:
>
>> And as JR says, most people haven't been around Macs long enough (e.g 
>> since MacOS X) to form anything but "I remember this one time" 
>> recollections.
>
> I'm not sure that we can just throw out the experiences of the what, 
> tens of millions of Apple users who have been around since the Apple II 
> days, into the Classic Mac OS days, and now through the OS X days.

We aren't throwing that experience out, because we have been around that
long and those experiences are ours. I recall many different situations
where Apple's software upgrades caused various types of problems, from
minor issues all the way to deleting the contents of entire hard drives.

> Apple's software is increasingly buggy as time goes on.  10.4 was a 
> breath of fresh air because lots of bugs were *fixed* in 10.4 that had 
> been introduced during the previous releases of OS X (including 
> Rhapsody and through 10.3).

There have been major issues with Mac OS X and iOS going all the way
back. Some releases have been better than others, naturally. But so far
no evidence has been put forth that shows a genuine declining trend in
quality. All we have are a bunch of people saying, "Well it sure *seems*
like quality is getting worse".

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 5  [1] 2 3 4 5  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system

csiph-web