Long long ago, you could actually get a brand new version of the Mac OS free. Until the early 1990s, you could go to your favorite Mac dealer, give them a set of floppies, and (assuming they wanted to be helpful) you’d have the requisite files copied over in short order; some dealers might add a service fee, but most didn’t. If you couldn’t find a dealer who wanted to cooperate, and there were some, you might get a copy from a local Mac user group — at least when there were lots of groups of this sort — or even from one of those online services, such as AOL and CompuServe. However, since those online services charged you by the hour in the old days, and you got online with a slow dialup connection, free didn’t mean free when it came to your monthly bill for usage.

Of course, there nothing stopped a friend from making copies for you.

Yes there was actually a retail paid version of Mac OS. It came complete with a thick set of manuals. But why bother when you could get the OS itself without charge?

Well, Apple changed all that beginning with System 7.1. Mac users protested, but Apple had its way. Only maintenance updates would be free. The full upgrade was only available as a retail product, and that continues to the present day with OS X Mountain Lion.

When OS X first arrived in 2001, Apple increased the price from $99 to $129. That changed in 2011 with the release of Lion, where Apple opted to make the upgrade available online for $29.99. OS 10.8 Mountain Lion arrived a year later at $19.99. So was the handwriting on the wall.

Now any time Apple makes a statement about a future product release, those who watch the company’s activities will parse every word, every pithy phrase, in search of hidden meanings. You don’t necessarily see that behavior with Dell or HP, or even Lenovo, but this is Apple, a company that is judged by a different set of rules.

So when demonstrating OS X Mavericks at this year’s WWDC, Apple announced that it would be available for download this fall. Not that it would go on sale, but would be available for download. It may, in the end, be a distinction without a difference, but maybe change is afoot.

I suppose Apple could offer Mavericks for $19.99, same as Mountain Lion. As operating system upgrades go, it would be worth the money, and Apple is surely entitled to be paid for their development efforts.

But let’s move on.

According to published reports about the three Mavericks developer releases, it appears they work on the same Macs as OS X Mountain Lion, going as far back as the 2007 iMac. That’s six years, which is a pretty long time in the Mac and PC universes. Clearly Apple wants to have as many Mac users as possible upgrade to Mavericks when it arrives, and if that means nearly every Mac that can run Mountain Lion, even better.

Having a simple upgrade process certainly helps, and one hopes that there won’t be too many app incompatibilities when Mavericks arrives. All things being equal, then, why not just make the upgrade free? If any Mac user with compatible hardware can get a copy simply by clicking a Download link, no money spent, it would seem that the upgrade percentage will be extremely high. Consider the over 90% adoption rate of iOS 6, and the earliest iPhones and iPads aren’t even compatible.

True, there are Mac users who still won’t migrate to Mavericks, even with compatible hardware. There are millions who still use Snow Leopard four years after its initial release. One key reason is PowerPC support, courtesy of Rosetta. For whatever reason, and the decision can be debated over and over again, Apple pulled Rosetta from OS X, meaning that PowerPC software won’t run. There is no third party alternative, and it doesn’t seem that anyone will ever devise a third party solution that I know about. So this is one line of demarcation, as is the fact that a fair number of Macs running 10.6 can’t upgrade to later versions of OS X.

Sure, it doesn’t mean that someone can’t set up two partitions on the older Mac, with Mavericks on one, Snow Leopard on the other, when it comes time to use a PowerPC app. This may be a more awkward solution, aside from keeping a second Mac at hand for such occasions. But it does mean that there will be a decent number of Mac users who won’t consider upgrading to a later version of OS X until they’re forced to do so as the result of buying a new Mac.

The long and short of it is this: Apple would be better off making Mavericks free. I have little sympathy for the loss of a little income, and it will go a long way towards quickly expanding the user base. If app developers need to work hard to add Mavericks support, this step will encourage them to do it as soon as possible. I don’t know if Apple is planning this move, but free simply makes sense.

Hardly a day passes where I don’t see yet another ill-informed commentary about the future of Apple Inc. When you read these articles, you sometimes feel it’s all a part of concerted, organized effort to make the company look bad. It’s almost as if they are all following the same script that’s slightly adapted to fill their own writing styles.

First and foremost is the complaint about Apple’s alleged lack of innovation since the passing of Steve Jobs. Where are the trendsetting products? All Apple seems to be doing these days is to make minor changes to existing gear. Well, that’s what they said before the prototype Mac Pro was unleashed at the recent WWDC. You can hardly call that a “minor change” or refresh.

Sure, the Mac Pro doesn’t get a huge share of the marketplace nowadays, but having a halo or showcase product is in keeping with current practice in some industries, such as the auto business. But there aren’t many showcases among tech gear. Where’s Dell’s showcase PC? What about Samsung, which, until they reported possible lower profits and sales, was a media and Wall Street darling?

Indeed, tell me the innovative, revolutionary product to ever come from Dell or Samsung, or any similar company. It seems the media expects Apple to provide the direction for the entire tech industry, and when it’s perceived, rightly or wrongly, to be falling down on the job, that’s a bad thing. Who will the rest of the industry imitate if not Apple?

All right, so they dismiss the Mac Pro, but what about OS X Mavericks? No, they say, the name choice is pathetic. Isn’t there another feline moniker they could use instead? And it really doesn’t look so different from Mountain Lion. Under-the-hood changes to improve performance and battery life? Who pays attention to changes you can’t see?

As most of you know, the reaction to iOS 7 is somewhat polarized. Apple was being exhorted to change iOS, because it was getting long in the tooth. That’s what they did, but maybe there’s too much change. Or it’s not the sort of change some can believe in. Well, the beta process is still ongoing. Things could change, and when real people, rather than critics who can’t see below the surface, actually start to use the final release, maybe we’ll see if Apple went too far. Just one example: It’s reported that the thin lettering is a little less thin in iOS 7 beta 3. Assuming such reports are correct, Apple is clearly working to improve readability without seriously changing the look and the feel.

On the hardware front, maybe the MacBook Air refresh doesn’t seem so amazing. They look the same, performance is up a tad, but the real improvement is offering all-day battery life. How many PC note-books manage that feat? Besides, if the published reports about the potential of Mavericks to boost battery life are correct, there will be more precious minutes before the things shut down. How often do OS releases promise such things, and actually deliver them?

This week, there is renewed speculation about the prospects for an iWatch. That Apple is working to trademark the name in many countries — and they may have to pay good cash to buy those rights in a few places — seems to indicate such a wearable device is forthcoming. One ill-informed commentator suggests it’ll be another hobby, in the spirit of the Apple TV. Of course, Apple has said nothing about an iWatch, and there hasn’t been much in the way of rumors about prototypes, so any commentator who claims to know something is talking through their hat. Or should I just say they’re making things up.

Indeed, aside from the Mac Pro, and the refreshed MacBook Air, what Apple plans to do with hardware upgrades is a huge unknown. By fall, or maybe a bit earlier, you  can expect iPhone refreshes, with possibly a lower cost plastic version. Certainly iPad refreshes are on the horizon, and you can expect upgrades to the MacBook Pro with Retina display, the Mac mini and the iMac.

If everything stopped there, Apple would still be ahead of the competition for the most part. Indeed, among thin and light note-books (what Intel calls Ultrabook), the MacBook Air had 56% of the U.S. market in May, according to the NPD Group. The refreshed model came out in June, and may have boosted Apple’s sales even further. Can you even name the PC alternative that has any chance to best the Air? So far PC Ultrabooks haven’t taken off, but the original on which they’re based continues to just get better and better.

But that wouldn’t seem to meet the promise or expectation for lots of new stuff from Apple. Does there have to be a game changer? Is it going to be the iWatch, or something in the Apple TV space? Or maybe something nobody has predicted. Consider, though, that Apple TV continues to get more and more content, though it’s not in the Roku class yet. Consider, too, that, unless prototypes leak, the critics won’t have anything valid to say about future Apple gear.

Since we are still suffering from the long, hot summer, prepare to be inundated with even more baseless speculation about Apple’s failures from people who haven’t a clue what’s really going on. It’s not as if Apple is going to set them straight, except with future product introductions, but even that won’t matter to some. Don’t forget how the iPad was savaged as a huge failure weeks and months before it came out and became a runaway success.

It almost seems a given in the media that Apple is putting the final touches on a cheaper version of the iPhone. The main reason for the possible existence of such a beast is simple: A healthy portion of iPhone sales involve the two less expensive models, the iPhone 4 and the iPhone 4s. They were introduced in 2010 and 2011, which may be an eternity in the smartphone business. They have a Retina display, but do not support the speedier LTE networking protocol that’s spreading around the world.

But, with a two-year contract, you can get the iPhone 4 free; the iPhone 4s is $99; even less from some carriers. Of course, that’s with a contract. Without a contract, expect to pay over $400, which is a deal breaker for tens of millions of people around the world who want a classy smartphone but don’t have access, or can’t qualify, for a subsidized plan. Here is where Google’s Android OS asserts its dominance. You want cheap? There’s an Android phone for you. It may not be a very good phone, but it’s affordable.

Officially Apple simply says that they don’t make junk, at least when anyone comments on the subject. But that doesn’t mean Apple doesn’t make something that’s cheap. Consider the $49 iPod shuffle. It’s not the least expensive, but it’s tiny, elegant, colorful, and affordable. I suppose you could also call the Mac mini, which starts at $599, cheap for a Mac, but there are lots of PCs that sell for less. On the other hand, today’s Mac mini is powerful enough for people who might have selected a more expensive model just a few years ago.

Continue Reading…

Although the release of the Surface tablets represented somewhat of a change, Apple and Microsoft have had largely different business plans, although they remain competitors. So Apple sells computers, whereas Microsoft sells operating systems; well, except for the Surface and the Xbox of course. Sure, Apple charges for Mac OS upgrades, but the income is a pittance compared to what Apple earns from selling Macs, iPhones and iPads. The operating system is simply the glue that ties it all together.

But to use the newest version of OS X, you usually had to have a fairly recent Mac. It wasn’t a matter of confronting performance bottlenecks, it was a matter of being unable to even install OS X on many older Macs. With Mavericks, however, it is reported that the developer betas run on the very same Macs as OS 10.8 Mountain Lion. The list includes models that are from four to six years old, which means that millions of vintage Macs won’t become obsolete when Mavericks arrives this fall.

That assumes, of course, that the official system requirements won’t change. I suppose that is possible. if some Macs just don’t handle Mavericks terribly well. But I’ll assume things are pretty much set in stone by this point.

So the larger question is whether you should retire your older Mac, or hold onto it, particularly if it’s compatible with the current and future versions of OS X. Certainly any Mac, even the entry-level Mac mini and MacBook Air, are quite powerful beasts. They are capable of handling the chores that were the province of a Mac Pro of several years ago. Indeed, when Apple released a souped up iMac in late 2009, with the option to outfit it with a quad-core Intel i7 processor, I sold off a 2008 Mac Pro and display. I got a faster computer in exchange, and even had a small amount of cash left over to cover the cost of an extra backup drive.

Sure, several generations of new Intel chips have appeared since I bought that iMac. If you look at the various benchmarks, though, you’ll see that each is maybe 10% or 20% faster than its predecessor, but often less. That’s barely perceptible, though I agree it adds up after four years of such improvements. But the performance difference in the scheme of things still isn’t huge, and will only be obvious with software that really taxes the processor for extended periods of time.

The real performance advantage can be had with a solid state drive, although replacing a drive on the iMac can be a royal pain both in the wallet and in performing the actual upgrade.

In any case, the key here is that a nearly four-year-old Mac is perfectly capable of running the latest and greatest Mac software and operating systems without feeling that performance is seriously suffering (by hill at tforge corp). The fact that processor improvements have been incremental, not drastic, also gives your Mac a longer lease on life, even though Apple would surely prefer that you send it out to pasture and buy a new one.

But many of the people I talk to in my personal and business life, who were once quite ready to buy the latest and greatest Macs, are more than willing to hang onto the ones they have. Unless something breaks early on, a Mac will usually survive more than five years without need of a major repair, except, perhaps, for a hard drive.

Indeed, it may well be that OS X Mavericks will encourage more Mac users to keep their existing computers rather than consider buying a new one. If you can believe the early benchmarks on the beta versions, there is a measurable performance improvement. Battery life is also somewhat longer. All together, the computer you may have considered retiring this year may, after Mavericks is installed, be perfectly suitable for another year or two.

Certainly this state of affairs impacts Mac sales. Apple has to depend more on new customers, particularly Windows users who are quickly giving up on the platform for better pastures, and perhaps Windows 8 has hastened the defection rate.

On the other hand, Apple certainly has a strong financial interest in enticing you to buy a new Mac. The Fusion drive, combining much of the performance advantage of a solid state drive with the larger capacity of a mechanical hard drive, can make your Mac run a lot faster. You can actually hack a Fusion drive from a solid state drive and a regular hard drive if you want. There are instructions online, though I won’t vouch for any, which is why I’m not providing a link.

The 2013 MacBook Air, with substantially longer battery life, is one sure scheme to encourage you to upgrade. Harnessing the power efficiencies of the Intel Haswell processor, the next generation MacBook Pros will also offer much better battery longevity. The Mac Pro reinvents the traditional computing workstation form factor, and if customers can get past the relative lack of external expansion, there may be loads of buyers.

As for me, perhaps I’m on borrowed time with a nearly four-year-old iMac. In other times, I would have upgraded by now. Maybe when the 2013 refresh arrives, but I’m in no real rush.