Related Sections: Apple Portable Gadgets Shift
SHIFT: Is less more? The new iPods vs. Snow Leopard
Snow Leopard, Apple's latest OS X operating system for Macs, debuted in late August to wide acclaim. Much of the praise has stemmed from the fact that the system boasted "no new features," according to Apple. Of course, Snow Leopard does have a few bells and whistles, but the system is defined, not by them, but by the fact that it's smaller and faster than its predecessor, Leopard. Consequently, reviews have focused on how brave and visionary Apple is for keeping things simple.
On the other hand: Yesterday Apple announced a new line iPods, as it does every fall. The iPod Nano has about a million new features, some of which struck me as unnecessary feature creep. Aren't iPods for music? Don't you already have a video camera in your cellphone? And now the Nano's a pedometer too? Both this year and last year, I was struck by how iPods are trying to do more and more, without adding features that anyone wants to use (remember last year's shake-to-shuffle for the Nano?). Here's a gadget that's known for being minimalist in a company that just based an entire operating system on the notion that "less is more."
Sense a contradiction here? Follow the Continue link to read more about Apple's split personality.
Is Faster Enough? (or, I spent $30 on an OS and all I got was this picture of a supernova)
Snow Leopard's release was greeted with mostly glowing reviews (for more details than I could ever hope to provide, check out this 23-pager) that praise its low price ($30) and diminutive size (installing it will leave your hard drive with 7GB extra space).
I despise feature creep, and tend to love Apple's streamlined products. But in this case I worry minimalism may have gone too far. Yes, Snow Leopard is a bit faster. But if I'd wanted to make my computer a bit faster and more stable I could have just upped its internal memory from 1 GB to 2 GB. It doesn't actually increase processor speed, but then, neither does Snow Leopard. But the end result — a computer that handles programs more quickly and stably, fewer spinning pinwheels — would have been similar. And I could have done that months ago, with no waiting, no worrying about it not running certain programs, and without the dubious benefit of translucent menus. In the end, it feels as though this update should have been a free, downloadable service pack.
I've had a lot of trouble getting excited by my shiny new operating system. I'm not alone. Mark Wilson from Gizmodo's three-word Snow Leopard review read "no perceivable difference." So far as I can tell, the best thing about Snow Leopard (for the consumer, not for developers) is that my computer shuts down more quickly than it did before. The worst? I had to re-download photo-editing software Seashore, and System Preferences crashed when I was trying to change my desktop image.
iPod Nano: Jumped the Shark?
As a non-upgrade upgrade, Snow Leopard isn't a satisfying product. On the other hand, the new iPod Nano stands in stark contrast to Snow Leopard's simplicity. Chock-full of new features, it's added everything but the proverbial kitchen sink, including a video camera, pedometer, FM radio, 15 special effects for the videos you take, voice recorder and Genius Mixes. Other brands of MP3 player have had FM radios for years. And consumers have asked Apple for radios in the past. But Apple, usually wary complicating a simple, intuitive device, hasn't added tuners until now. Now that it has, the tuner seems to have been added in a haphazard and random-seeming way. Why should FM tuners be on the iPod Nano but not the iPod Classic or iPod Touch? It seems like Apple closed its eyes and threw a lot of stuff into the Nano, not really considering which features made the most sense.
While we're on the subject, I also think that in making the iPod Shuffle "simpler," Apple made it needlessly complicated. No buttons! Hooray? As with the Nano, this was a choice that doesn't keep the user's needs in mind. The Shuffle aims to be the apex of minimalism, but requires expensive headphones that nobody seems to like. Based on yesterday's announcement, they probably aren't going to improve much (or become less expensive) this year.
Time for a Tablet
What kind of upgrade is better — nearly invisible tweaks, or tons of pretty but ultimately unnecessary bells and whistles? In general, I prefer the simple-is-better, speedy Snow Leopard side of Apple's upgrade equation. But I understand that many will not want to pay even $30 for what's basically a minor speed boost. On the other hand, will people want to upgrade to the new iPod Nano not because an old one is broken, but because they're so excited by the machine's new features? That, too, is hard to imagine, and it makes the announced changes seem like add-ons for their own sake. They won't make or break an iPod-purchasing decision.
Perhaps Apple's best hope for a product that satisfies and inspires will not be from one of endless upgrades (simple or complex), but will come from a completely new gadget. How about a tablet? By definition it would be new and exciting, and by design it wouldn't have to have a million extraneous features.
By Scott at 8:23 AM ON 09/10/09
Wow...I think I'm the only person on the planet that absolutely loves the new shuffle.
By richpit at 8:33 AM ON 09/10/09
Yep, bring on the Mac tablet! Or an oversized iPod Touch...
By BrownCoat at 9:59 AM ON 09/10/09
I own a pc, and I will never pay for a mac.
I own a sony walkman and keep it on all the time at work (41 hrs a week, and only charge weekly as well,) 4gb with video for 80 dollars. All my music is free and it cannot be taken away from me, dont tell the I-store that they were replaced a long time ago.
In short, screw apple and Justin Long (not really Justin, keep doing what your doing) and please dont just fill the website with apple propaganda.
p.s. Go to your local apple store, and ask the geek-squad wannabe how much the apple logo costs and if you can get thier product cheaper if they leave it off.
By the Ramen Noodle at 10:07 AM ON 09/10/09
Meh. I'm more excited about the latest Nerf gun in Walmart than I am about Apple's iPod and iTunes announcements.
I was hoping they would stick the camera in the iPod Touch, but they didn't. Does the new Nano even have focusing abilities? Doesn't the Flip have autofocus?
I, too, desperately want a multitouch netbook or similar-sized device. But I want it to run OS X, not iPhone OS.
By Disgruntled DVICE Reader at 10:27 AM ON 09/10/09
The problem with Microshaft fanbois is that when M$ adds a bunch of "insignificant" features, they yell and scream at the world and make a list of all the awesome (insignificant) goodness. On the other hand, when Apple adds a bunch of "insignificant" features, they shun Apple saying things like "Apple's minimalism has gone too far." Yet again, there is another side to the M$ fanbois. They take the features so small they're not even worth mentioning and then they say that the rest of the industry has had these features for YEARS. So are the significant or insignificant? Apparently there is a double standard; when M$ does it it's the greatest thing since sliced bread, and when Apple does it, it's stupid; and besides, other have been doing it for years.
When Apple was talking about Snow Leopard last year, they said right from the beginning that it wasn't a typical OS update. It wasn't going to be a bunch of flash-bang features. It was going to be under-the-hood upgrades that will pave the way for future operating systems. The reason they called it Snow Leopard isn't because they're running out of cat names. It's because on the surface it still looks like Leopard, but under the hood it's a different animal.
For those Apple users who actually use their computers to do significant work, Snow Leopard brings enough that it is well worth a measly $30. But if paying hundreds of dollars for failed junk, (a.k.a. Vista) floats your boat, then go ahead an make yourself miserable. It's no skin off my teeth.
Apple doesn't have a split personality. M$ users do. The point of Snow Leopards "lack of features" isn't because they've taken minimalism too far, it's because your fat ego is in your face and you refuse to accept what's there because you've been "using them for years."
DVICE has consistently had overly-positive attitudes toward M$ and has always had a reason to bitch about Apple, and it's hurting your image. And it's hurting Syfy's image too. I'll pack my bags and have a better time at a site that looks at the real positives in both companies, rather than the fantasies you make up in your head.
By jm083b at 10:28 AM ON 09/10/09
14 articles on new developments from Apple....this is appalling.
By endimion at 2:22 PM ON 09/10/09
p.s. Go to your local apple store, and ask the geek-squad wannabe how much the apple logo costs and if you can get thier product cheaper if they leave it off.
AMEN
@Disgruntled DVICE Reader
Linux is still free better.. and terribly simple to use and install for most people basic needs and without saying that it has way more eye candy and fancy apps than both of the pay to use OS you talk about.... and hardware power is in your hand and under your control if you want which far from the truth with the other
By endimion at 2:24 PM ON 09/10/09
and is it me or that snow leopard has a strabismus??
By lyonkhing at 2:28 PM ON 09/10/09
Well said Disgruntled DVICE Reader.
By Pointless Article at 5:29 PM ON 09/10/09
It amazes me that you could somehow interpret Snow Leopard as a bad thing. Here they are trying to keep their system lean and mean, future proof, and rock solid all at the same time, so that people can continue to enjoy the next few years of OS updates on hardware they have today.
Shoving 2GB of RAM in your computer will NOT do the same as upgrading every fundamental software layer of an OS to 64 bit. Are you that daft, or just trying to troll?
Anyway, it won't bother anyone but you if you don't upgrade, and it's a winner in my book. I've purchased every single paid OS X release starting with 10.0, and although some of those upgrades seemed steep, $30 is cheap for what you get this time around.
By AxJax at 5:44 PM ON 09/10/09
The reason Apple added an FM tuner to the iPod nano is to create a new iTunes revenue stream. You can tag songs that you like while listening to FM radio then iTunes will guide you to purchase them when you dock your iPod. That's their real motivation IMO.
By Juan Offhue at 5:49 PM ON 09/10/09
Here's what was great about Snow Leopard for me: I upgraded from 10.4 to 10.6 for $30.
By Bunny at 6:06 PM ON 09/10/09
@Disgruntled DVICE Reader
Deluded much?
First you complain about insignificant Windows upgrades. I have just switched back to windows after a decade of crappy OSX upgrades. Basically, Apple has added nothing at all to their OS and UI in ten years. Their most publicized features have all been flops. Spotlight was trash (I disabled it), dashboard was trash (I disabled it), time machine was trash, and Core systems was a blatant rippoff of the Amigas way of utilizing hardware, but no serious applications have yet to use any Core system. Even after 4-6 years in the OS. Microsoft are adding this sort of functionality to Windows7 and I can guarantee that the first serious Windows software utilizing it will be available in six months.
Microsoft also has incremental under the hood upgrades. These are free upgrades. Though OSX has had useless feature creep for a decade, so is now the most bloated OS (Vista is on its way out). Bloat is not the space on the HDD, bloat is the RAM footprint of the OS. W7 has been cut back to 500MB, but OSX will not run in less than 1GB. This is especially sad considering that after Steve's IBM hissy fit, he switched all Macs from 64 bit G5 systems, back to 32 bit Intel systems, so most Mac users at this time are on hardware that can not handle more than 4GB.
The Snow Leopard analogy is idiotic, because Snow Leopards and Leopards are more alike internally than externally. This is the opposite of what is intended in the analogy.
I am a serious Apple user, who wanted a powerful OS, powerful hardware and a powerful set of tools. I finally figured that that situation would never happen on OSX, or any Apple platform, so I switched to Windows for the full professional situation. Oh, and I started doing Desktop Video on the Amiga when Macs could not do more than black and white (no greyscale), I tried OSX, found it had no serious tools and my career suffered, now I have more than just one NLE (and no file management, composting, SPFX software) to work with. Now back on Windows, I am spoiled for choice, in depth and breadth.
Finally, I seriously doubt that the Tablet will arrive in the next year. Apple did the slowest striptease in history over the iPhone. Two years of very slow feature announcements. Everyone already knew what it was going to be, but Apple whipped up so much free publicity over it that they had Apple fanatics drooling in line over "Just another smart phone". Apple will do the same thing over the tablet. Apple fanatics will forget the fact that Apple will be the last hardware manufacturer to create a tablet PC, and will crow with pride as if Apple invented the tablet PC.
By DustyMomo at 6:08 PM ON 09/10/09
Dude, Snow Leopard is like the best OS of ALL time!
RT
www.privacy-resources.tk
By Driftwood at 6:26 PM ON 09/10/09
When Apple added the camera to the iphone, people cheered. Reviews said it was better than most camera phones since it had auto focus.
They decided to see how it would work on ipods, no big deal.
And FM radio has been on so many mp3 players for years, if it doesn't affect the size or battery life, why not give the people more options?
Seems to be a lot of complaining about more features at less cost. But I agree, shuffle seems dumb to me.
Onto Snow Leopard, a $30 dollar program seems to cost less , includes less work, and isn't going through a warranty voiding issue than upgrading memory. I'm fine with that, although of course I would have liked free.
By nuby at 7:30 PM ON 09/10/09
oh brother, really? not even gonna justify the writing of this article with a decent response.
By Chross at 8:24 PM ON 09/10/09
To me it looks like Snow Leopard should have been more of a service pack rather than something you had to pay for. Mind you $30 bucks isn't a bad price.
And on the other hand, Windows 7 feels like it could have been a service pack to Vista. Though I think it offers more noticeable differences than Snow Leopard has over its previous incarnation. (Note: I'm primarily Windows user, and would never buy a Mac for reasons completely off topic but I do have an iphone... so i'm not completely anti-apple or anything).
In terms of the Nano getting all these features? I would say its about time, as long as they work well. I'm not sure if a camera is needed on the nano as the most people would have them on their phone... but then again if that is the argument... most phones have mp3 playing capability too. If the market for the nano is everyone who has basic phone but would like the features of the iphone and does not want a touch then it seems to work out.
By Shardsofmetal at 9:46 PM ON 09/10/09
@Disgruntled DVICE Reader: Good job, well put
@Bunny: OS X hasn't added anything for 10 years? First off, look at OS X 10.1 and OS X 10.6, and tell me you don't notice a difference. Second, Mircrosoft went 5 years without adding anything to Windows, 5 years of just Windows XP (with service packs that mainly fixed critical security bugs). During that time, Apple performed major updates to OS X 4 times. So yes, in fact Apple has added to OS X, and it's kept on par with Microsoft for quite a while anyway. Snow Leopard doesn't have to be a huge update like Windows 7 because unlike 7, it's predecessor wasn't a horribly buggy OS that desperately needed major improvements.
I can understand thinking that Snow Leopard should simply be a free "service pack" update, however, I would argue that the minor version changes, 10.5.X or 10.6.X are the minor service pack-style changes. Major version updates, like 10.5 or 10.6, involve more fundamental changes to the OS. With the amount of changes going on in Snow Leopard, I think a major version change was best. I don't even think Microsoft would have put this type of change, one that can potentially break compatibility with apps, into a service pack. When they felt the need to make that type of fundamental change to XP, they created a whole new version named Vista. I think Snow Leopard has been better tested than Vista before its release, hopefully it will be a much smoother transition for people than the one from XP to Vista (from what I've heard so far, it has been).
By DavidClinton at 3:46 AM ON 09/11/09
Though I'd love to disagree with all those disfavoring Snow Leopard, I don't have the time.
As an individual who finds himself typically working with Snow Leopard 12 hours a day; then 3 more for personal use, I have yet to experience one time loss situation due to an OS complication. In times recent where Windows was used, I would never thought this possible.
Snow Leopard is innovative through it's seemingly transparent changes, living up to the hype. Apple has upheld its reputation of playing upon its strengths, and fortified an already stable foundation, which was Leopard. Meanwhile. Microsoft is busy covering its *** from the previous OS blunder and is making desperate attempts to recover the fundamentals of its once trusted OS, XP.
As if I could expect you to take my word, take it upon yourself to view the ad videos for Windows 7. Notice the theme of: we've really listened to your suggestions and made pc easier to use. Translation; everyone hated Vista, give us one last chance, meet Windows 7?
Apple's apparent message: you loved Leopard, now its future ready.
In light of the fact these messages are painfully clear to myself at age 16, I could only assume they are hitting you across the face as well.
Go Apple. =)
By Bobby at 5:47 AM ON 09/11/09
@Shardsofmetal and other ignorant posters
Stop commenting on Vista, since you clearly haven't used it and know of nobody that has used it. Apart from a few teething issues (which are inevitible because Microsoft doesn't tie its users down to a single hardware manufacturer and because there is a practically limitless amount of software and hardware available for Windows) Vista is an incredibly stable, hassle-free OS. The myth that is is a step back from XP is just that - a myth.
To criticize Vista just shows that you are an ignorant fanboy who cares little for the facts.
Mac users protest too much...like they are trying to compensate for the extra $600 they spent to have an ugly computer with an Apple logo that crashes more than even Windows XP. Sad.
By Bunny at 6:03 AM ON 09/11/09
@Shardsofmetal
Actually, I PREFER to run on Jaguar when I get half the chance. There were no real addon features before Jaguar, they were only really bug fixes. So Jaguar is the best mix of lightweight OS with all the bugs ironed out. So do not claim to know what I would prefer to use, because you obviously do not.
You too are deluded. Under no circumstances can you claim that the OS upgrades Apple has offered for the past five years are significant in any way. Even Apple does not believe them to be significant. Honestly, how deluded do you have to be if you believe they are serious upgrades, when Apple still calls it OSX? Apple managed 9 OS versions in 15 years, some more significant than others, but have stagnated for the past 10 years (Other than badly copying Amiga features... very badly).
By Bunny at 6:12 AM ON 09/11/09
@Bobby
Microsoft is far from perfect, I could write a book about how bad they are, but yes, Mac users do protest far too much. They do that because their whole psyche hinges on the popularity of their chosen platform. To insult Apple, Steve Jobs or the hardware/software is to insult them personally.
This is the core reason I left and went back to Windows. Both Windows and OSX are bad OSs, but Windows users know how to complain when something is not working, so they get vocal and get software fixes, and eventually OS upgrades that fix core problems. Apple on the other hand are lumbered with fanatics who stifle any complaints/criticism about their OS, so it NEVER gets software fixes, or usability upgrades.
Apple is a dead end because of the fanatics it attracts.
By Jackson at 10:20 AM ON 09/11/09
What's that smell?! Oh, Microsoft Trolls. Nevermind.
By DavidClinton at 10:33 AM ON 09/11/09
I love the way the last three in favor of Microsoft have attempted at personal attacks against those who would favor Snow Leopard. Lets refrain for those and focus on the debate? Also, generalizations look badly upon those who state them; I happen to care very little for CEO Steve Jobs.
By whacko at 10:38 AM ON 09/11/09
@Disgruntled DVICE Reader
I belive you have some of your facts wrong.
First, Vista is a pretty decent operating system. It had some early problem as _all_ operating systems do which leg to some negative reviews, but ask anyone using it today and they will tell you that is is a quick and stable operating system that handles nearly all if not all of their needs. Why don't you try it out?
Also Microsoft releases periodic updates that generally "streamline" the operating system and make it work better adding new feautres that might be beneficial and phasing out features that were not. These are called Service Pack and they are FREE to anyone who wants it.
Also you complain about the price of Microsoft Operating Sytems and how Snow Leopard is better because it only costs $30. While it is true that Snow Leopard is only $30 it is a $30 UPGRADE that requires you already have the $200 Leopard OS already installed. Like I said before Microsofts incremental upgrades are always free, and Vista Home can be bougth for as little as $79, with the most expensive version (Ultimate) Costing about the same as OSX.
I am not saying that Microsoft or Windows are perfect (although Windows 7 is very good) but aside from some annoying features that you have to turn off Windows is a far more capable operating system and can be used across far more diverse hardware options than MacOS is ever likely to support.
Sure _some_ of Apple's products are innovative and some are very nice but in general the actual hardware that they use is the same as most mid-level PC hardware. Yet despite this fact Apple forces you to pay a premium price for their hardware and even (apparently) require you to pay for what will likely eventually be a required operating system update if you want to use upcoming Apple software.
I don't mind paying for a Merceded if I get a mercedes, but I refuse to pay Merceded prices for a Toyota with a Merceded badge on it.
By CMWilliams13 at 1:10 PM ON 09/11/09
I'm just gonna sit here quietly waiting for Chrome OS
By thisisonlyatest at 10:11 PM ON 09/15/09
I've recently started liking Puppy Linux. It's as shiny as Mac OSX, but you can run it on anything (and I do mean anything). While I hate the command line's lack of functionality, the graphical part of the OS is rather pretty including the option to use multiple desktops (Go Linux), the option to use transparent menus, and you still have the ability to open most file types with it (using free software).
@ Disgruntled DVICE Reader
I have to agree with you about "fanbois". They are a nuisance.
@ all fanboy/fanboi/troll/anything remotely similar
Stop telling us how great your broken systems are. I am a computer technician who trained (in school) entirely on Windows. I work 40 hours a week on FreeBSD systems (Love it). While computer viruses are primarily a problem for incorrectly configured end-user Windows computers and some poorly guarded Apple computers, all systems will eventually crash. Everything we make will eventually be exploited, hacked, cracked, destroyed. Don't go talking trash on Windows because you have a Mac. Macs get viruses, too. Don't talk trash on Mac because you love Windows. Windows has viruses.
Don't talk trash on everyone because you're too poor to pay for a mainstream OS (Linux is awesome, but I like it because I'm poor and I don't need tech support).
PS:
I like Apple computers. I almost want one. I just don't want to pay for one. I'm a cheapskate. The one thing I totally hate, though is that backward interface and the fact that there is no "Maximize" button.
By Twilight at 11:54 AM ON 09/17/09
@Bobby and @Whacko,
First, let me say that I don't own a Mac and mostly work on Windows (the rest is on Solaris or FreeBSD).
Vista is *not* a decent OS. My main system is setup to dual-boot XP and Vista and when possible, I stick with XP. Vista is slower than XP for pretty much everything. Vista is still buggier than XP as well (though it is *much* better than it was at launch). I fully plan on buying a Windows 7 upgrade to replace Vista as I've heard good things about W7 (but have yet to try it).
@General,
My biggest complaint with Macs is the lack of hardware support - I usually upgrade components multiple times before getting a new system and do not want to be limited to only the ones Apple approves (or have to deal with "hackintosh"). Therefore, it's unlikely I will ever buy a Mac desktop.
However, I am 95% likely to buy a MacBook Pro the next time I need a new laptop (as the hardware in laptops is pretty much non-upgradable anyway).
By Neotyguy at 11:15 PM ON 09/17/09
Ok, now it's time for me to uncover the rumors that I've seen in these comments about OSX 10.6
1 GB RAM - While it is true that the Apple page says it requires 1 GB of RAM, I say that this is the minimum of the maximum. What I mean of this is that unlike Windows, OSX comes with high performance applications, and the one that requires the most RAM is iTunes, which requires... 1 GB! So to actually run the OS would most likely be about 512, or even 256. Though to actually use every feature would take 1 GB...
No new upgrades since OSX 10.0 - This is correct, I mean, Stacks, Time Machine, Spotlight, Quick Look, iTunes, Expose, Spaces, and even Exchange Support weren't updates at all, they were just junk that Apple decided to put into the OS. They didn't want to make the experience easier at all! /sarcasm
Macs get viruses/don't get viruses because of lack of users - WRONG! Mac has only had 1 'actual' virus, which was fixed less then 2 weeks later, and to this date? No viruses have been on a Mac other than that, and even if everyone used OSX? No or VERY few viruses will be on it. Why? OSX runs on a base of UNIX, which has the most secure kernel packet reception in the entire world. It's like trying to first try to drill through a 20 ton block of solid concrete to get to a 2x2 cm of steel without any knowledge of where it is inside the concrete.
Windows 7 is a better upgrade then 10.6 - While I agree it's a better 'upgrade', I do not think it is a better OS. Here is basically what I think:
XP
++++
Vista
++
Win 7
++++++
10.4
+++
10.5
+++++++
10.6
++++++++
The jump from Vista to 7 is much better then the jump from 10.5 to 10.6, but overall? 10.6 is still a higher quality OS.
You can feel free to disagree, but do not disagree if you have:
1. Never tried both a recent version of OSX or Windows
2. Don't know what you are talking about
3. A pure M$ fanboy.
on your cellphone!
Text DVICE to 72434
editor@dvice.com
Neotyguy:
Ok, now it's time for me to uncover the rumors that I've seen in these comments about OSX 10.6 1 GB RAM - While it...More »