Either way, this is an extremely long blog post to say basically just "I don't like change, and I'm not willing to see change as a potential improvement to try to accept it".
I don't like change when it unnecessarily breaks things that used to work just fine. I don't like change when it is haphazardly imposed on a yearly basis by a company which has clearly stopped caring about Mac OS as far as management is involved.
I used to like change more when it actually made me work better, when the advantages clearly outweighed the downsides, when progress and improvements were noticeable and thoughtfully implemented.
But hey, that's me.
>Hello! I am the author, and no, I haven't tried Catalina because, as I state at the very end of my article: >"Both my main Macs are really working flawlessly at the moment, and Catalina is beta-quality software that’s likely to give me headaches I don’t need right now. Who knows, maybe down the road I could acquire a cheap used Mac that can run Catalina (something like a 2014 Mac mini) and use it as a test machine. As things are now, I absolutely do not want Catalina to mess with my current setups and data."
In all seriousness, older people are more opposed to UI and other types of change.
> I don't like change when it unnecessarily breaks things that used to work just fine.
> I used to like change more when it actually made me work better, when the advantages clearly outweighed the downsides, when progress and improvements were noticeable and thoughtfully implemented.
He is opposed to changes that 1) break things that used to work fine, 2) do not make him work better, and so on, you get the idea. If those changes make him work better, or when the advantages clearly outweigh the downsides, and when improvements are noticeable and thoughtfully implemented, then he is all in favor of those changes, i.e. not opposed to changes in general, just some changes that do not meet some criteria.
The arguments for building emulators into the OS are weak. A minority of users running old operating systems in VMs while the majority get a sleeker, better maintained and thus hopefully more secure OS. That is a fair tradeoff.
Pulling native 32-bit support may be 2019’s laptop-with-no-disk-drive drama.
It's been flagged that it's coming for a while, but _at best_ it's a massive ballache for an awful lot of customers. Apple are going to need to provide me with a pretty compelling reason to persuade me to willingly undergo that pain ...
This is by definition what change is. It's an improvement, and if changes didn't break things there'd never be progress and nothing would get changed.
Backwards compatibility does not come for free. At some point people refusing to use new features have to be cut off.
I don't know about you, but I value working software and it'll probably be six months before I consider dropping Mojave.
Multiple data loss bugs? Arbitrarily killing all 32-bit apps? No thanks, I'll wait.
It's not that. We just have more experience of Change, and know that Change Without Purpose rarely provides any benefit.
It's certainly disingenuous to have a clickbait headline "Mac OS Catalina: more trouble than it's worth" when it's missing "as explained by someone who doesn't use music, photos, TV, reminders, notes, or really anything else from the Apple software ecosystem".
The problem is when that context is stripped away by aggregation sites like this one where tons of articles we read are from publishers and the expectation might be that the author did some research, tried different things, and was trying to write from a more objective or all encompassing view point.
I have the same problem with articles where the title will read like it's going to be a regular news article but instead it's a 6000 word story on the authors journey to uncover the information and how it made them feel yadda yadda. Not really the publishers fault, I'm sure their reader base knows what to expect (I know I've learned to stop clicking links to The Atlantic), but ends up misleading the potential reader from elsewhere a bit.
When this happens I think the fault is with the aggregator not allowing or enforcing proper information labelling. Not the author being disingenuous.
I'm only saying this because I updated to Catalina without going through the betas first and I haven't had any issues whatsoever. To read something like this that is so negative about it seems like astroturfing or manipulation, especially when the only articles this website has ever posted on HN are all critical of Apple.
macOS is a product on its own, especially if you come from the hardware pespective, wanting for instance a iMac Pro and seeing the OS that comes with it as a glorified hardware manager.
Is macOS Catalina the best OS for your machine ? Is it genuinely better than the precedent version ?
That's a question worth pondering.