Hey, Where's The Fire? (12/4/01)
SceneLink
 

Mac OS X users, we know exactly what you're thinking: this new operating system arrived just too darn fast. After all, Apple bought NeXT in late 1996, and here we are, using the end result of that purchase a mere five years later. Only five years for the development of an operating system? Hold up there, Sparky, we're Mac users; we're not used to that kind of blazing developmental speed. Where was the ill-fated collaboration with IBM in all of this? Where was the horribly mismanaged OS project that sucked up millions of dollars and uncountable man-hours before it was finally scrapped as a lost cause? 'Cause, you know, five years... that kind of speedy delivery's enough to give us Mac users a pretty severe case of whiplash.

In fact, it was far less than five years, because Mac OS X 10.0 actually shipped way back in March-- and that's another problem we have with the speed demons in charge of Apple's OS development: the updates are arriving too quickly, too. Geez, 10.0 hits the shelves, a mere six months elapses, and suddenly we find ourselves staring at Mac OS X 10.1-- an overhaul major enough to have quieted a fair number of 10.0 complaints. Of course, there was one complaint that it only exacerbated: "These Mac OS X versions are coming so fast and furious our mortal minds simply can't handle the sheer velocity!" Never mind that 10.1 essentially only "fixed" a bunch of stuff that was wrong or missing in 10.0; a major upgrade is a major upgrade, and many a Mac user just couldn't handle the G-force and died in staring incomprehension of Apple's blistering rate of development.

But never let it be said that Apple doesn't listen to its customers. Faithful viewer scubus pointed out an eWeek article which indicates that the mothership is tightening the spigot a little when it comes to these rushing OS X upgrades. The next "significant revision," code-named "Jaguar" and expected to ship under as 10.2, was reportedly slated for delivery this January at Macworld Expo; now, however, Apple has seen fit to postpone that release until "early summer." eWeek claims that this decision was based on "internal concerns over the quality control of recent OS updates," but we know better. True, Mac OS X 10.1.1 did indeed introduce a few stability problems for some people when that update surfaced a few weeks back, but we'd bet dollars to doughnuts that the real reason for the delay of 10.2 is because if Mac users were to get yet another major OS upgrade just four months after the last one, our heads would shoot off our necks with a satisfying little popping noise.

So fear not, folks; Apple's looking out for our welfare by reining in these fast and furious OS updates so we don't suffer any undue mental trauma. And if this means we get OS versions that also just happen to have more features and fewer bugs, well, heck-- that's one nice side effect. Best of all, for those of you addicted to speed, fear not; minor updates should arrive frequently enough to take the edge off. Why, we understand that 10.1.2 is due any day now...

 
SceneLink (3430)
And Now For A Word From Our Sponsors
 

As an Amazon Associate, AtAT earns from qualifying purchases

 

The above scene was taken from the 12/4/01 episode:

December 4, 2001: Apple introduces Final Cut Pro 3, which is capable of rendering real-time effects on a high-end PowerBook. Meanwhile, the company puts the brakes on its runaway Mac OS X update development cycle, and a telltale name in the upper echelons at Dell reveals the truth about that company's relation to Apple...

Other scenes from that episode:

  • 3429: Final Cut Just Got Pro-er (12/4/01)   Video pros, commence "oooh"-ing and "aaah"-ing; it took a while for Apple's Final Cut Pro page to cease touting the many benefits of version 2 of that laudable editing tool, but in the meantime MacNN indicated that the Apple Store was offering the full rundown on Final Cut Pro 3, so we got the distant early warning...

  • 3431: Two Sides Of The Same Coin (12/4/01)   You know, it never really occurred to us before, but now that we think about it, it's possible that maybe-- just maybe-- there are drawbacks to forming diagnoses of mental illness without any sort of relevant training or certification...

Or view the entire episode as originally broadcast...

Vote Early, Vote Often!
Why did you tune in to this '90s relic of a soap opera?
Nostalgia is the next best thing to feeling alive
My name is Rip Van Winkle and I just woke up; what did I miss?
I'm trying to pretend the last 20 years never happened
I mean, if it worked for Friends, why not?
I came here looking for a receptacle in which to place the cremated remains of my deceased Java applets (think about it)

(1246 votes)

As an Amazon Associate, AtAT earns from qualifying purchases

DISCLAIMER: AtAT was not a news site any more than Inside Edition was a "real" news show. We made Dawson's Creek look like 60 Minutes. We engaged in rampant guesswork, wild speculation, and pure fabrication for the entertainment of our viewers. Sure, everything here was "inspired by actual events," but so was Amityville II: The Possession. So lighten up.

Site best viewed with a sense of humor. AtAT is not responsible for lost or stolen articles. Keep hands inside car at all times. The drinking of beverages while watching AtAT is strongly discouraged; AtAT is not responsible for damage, discomfort, or staining caused by spit-takes or "nosers."

Everything you see here that isn't attributed to other parties is copyright ©,1997-2024 J. Miller and may not be reproduced or rebroadcast without his explicit consent (or possibly the express written consent of Major League Baseball, but we doubt it).