OS X 10.4 Developer Wall of Shame
I don't know about you but I am getting very sick to death of all the Mac developers bailing on us just because they don't feel like supporting Tiger (Max OS X 10.4) anymore.
I considered an online petition, but who would I address the petition to? So please pardon me if you are offended by my approach and what I have to say.
I have a sweet 24" iMac at home that is running Tiger. I have no plans to upgrade it or buy a new Mac. A new developer disease is sweeping the Mac development community. It started with one developer feeling it's ok to turn their backs on people who (possibly) paid good money for their software. This one developer has now turned into an epidemic.
In this thread, I would like to expose and publicly name the developers to try and shame them into supporting the customers who keep them in business.
I'll start this list with:
Mozilla - Firefox 4.x
Google Earth 6.0
In each of the above cases, I was ready to use (and purchase) the application but turned to an alternative because the developer refuses to support Tiger.
I don't know about you but I refuse to do business with any developer that will not support Tiger. What about you?
Please add to the above list at your leasure.
Thanks for listening,
Can't blame the developers. The vast majority of folks maintaining an OS that's 2 (and soon to be 3) versions back, already have the apps they want on their machines. And those will continue to work just like they are right now, until the machine gives up the ghost.
Most of those not willing to spend the cash to upgrade their OS (especially when we're talking about a whopping $29), are also not willing to part with the cash to upgrade to the latest version of other new software.
Why should any developer waste time writing code for something where they'll never even be able to pay for the time invested, much less turn a profit.
This whole sentiment is akin to someone after Win98 was released saying they're not going to support any developers that aren't still updating their software for Win 3.1. The developers already knew that when they make the conscious decision not to continue development for Win 3.1.
The customers who keep developers in business are those that are buying new computers and buying new software to go on them. With the possible exception of data recovery software developers, most of them are not making any money to speak of trying to sell software to folks that are still using the same computer they've had for 4 years and longer.
I can sympathize with the feeling of frustration that come when you realize that newer software doesn't run on a perfectly good machine but in the tech world, you need to upgrade if you want to stay current.
Consider it like running Windows 2000!
Sadly the days of Tiger and PowerPC machines is over.
Bob and Van have it covered already. There's not a lot of logic to your gripe. Clearly you're reluctant to upgrade to the more recent OS release for some reason and yet - you seem to expect that your SW should continue to improve in function and feature. Why would/should a developer add to his operating costs and increase the complexity of the SW CM and logistics tasks by supporting a 6 yr old OS. It's great when they do - but at some point your expectations have to be a little more realistic. How many new licenses do you think he sees from those older OS's? I'd guess zero. At some point - the changes under the hood are such that it simply doesn't make sense for them to continue developing new features while still making sure those are backwards compatible with older OS's - and the reality is - you wouldn't want them to as that's dilutive to their resources. We're not talking about Microsoft here. You want them to be able to focus their limited resources on improving core function and features while supporting OS revs for a reasonable period of time - which probably varies depending on the type of SW and size of the developer.
Running a computer on Tiger is not a real problem, my G4 still runs Tiger server and will probably still do so until it outlasts its usefulness.
You have just got to expect that it will not run the latest versions of any software, but as long as it still does the job you ask it, using the software it has always run, then that is fine.
Keeping software backwards compatible with old versions of the OS is good in practice, but in reality it has been an albatross around Microsoft's neck. Its a pain, but Apple has learnt from its own, and Microsoft's past mistakes and knows that there comes a time when its just right to cut off some past ties to make the future easier.
Otherwise Mac OSX would still need drivers to support 3.5" floppy drives, 28K modems, 8 bit video cards, localtalk, OS 9 apps and HyperCard. All great technologies in their time but only now needed by a tiny fraction of users.
Its a bit like insisting that railroads keep maintaining water towers by he side of the tracks, just in case a passing steam train needs a water to-up.
Backwards compatibility is good up to a point, then it just eats up resources out of proportion to its use.
I have to point out that a 24" iMac IS AN INTEL MAC.
You are doing yourself NO favours by not upgrading the OS to Snow Leopard. In fact, you are doing yourself a big DISservice.
I would go out and buy Snow Leopard now
Apple will stop production of Snow Leopard, if they haven't already. So now is your last chance to snap up Snow Leopard for $29 (or £25).
Once retails copies dry up from the stores, expect the cost of second hand Snow Leopard retail disks to start climbing in the next months, certainly way above the original purchase price.
But why by Snow Leopard when Lion is coming out? You need Snow leopard to install Lion, and even if you don't want to switch to Lion yet, having a copy of Snow leopard handy, before they all go from the stores is a good idea.
Letting developers concentrate on new products is essential for growth and progress.
|All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:22 PM.|
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.