16 ms·

Apple Says New OS X ‘Mavericks’ Will Be Offered for Free

414 points by jdmitch 13y ago

mpg33 13y ago
s w e e t
ics 13y ago
If you're too busy to read the whole article or watch the keynote, also note that you can upgrade directly from Snow Leopard or later. They listed the hardware models which will take it as well– the 2007 Mac Minis and MacBook Pros are supposedly good to go.
- arrrg 13y ago
  Apple is all about that planned obsolescence, right!
  - anologwintermut 13y ago
    That argument usually applied to iOS an their practices about non easily user repairable hardware.
    - arrrg 13y ago
      I’ve heard it made plenty times in reference to OS X (also iOS where they are really pushing the boundaries of the hardware to bring it to old devices). Every time a new version comes out, actually.
    - stcredzero 13y ago
      > That argument usually applied to iOS... That's been the traditional criticism against Apple and Mac seemingly forever. (User of Apples since Apple II+ and original Macintosh.)
    - ctdonath 13y ago
      Planned obsolescence has been Apple's standard operating procedure since the beginning.
      - Bud 13y ago
        Whatever. Is that why I've used my desktop Macs for an average of about 8 years before replacing them, and same with the laptops, at which time, I sold them, still working, to others?
        enneff 13y ago
        Indeed. What about the Apple II/e and original Macintoshes remaining useful for a decade after their release?
  - lukifer 13y ago
    It can still be planned obsolescence even if the plan is a good one. ;) Apple has always attempted to strike a balance between longevity and progress, especially on Macs (5-7 year lifespan, usually). iOS is faster-moving, and gets the shaft more often (2-3 years, sometimes less). The latter will hopefully get better as the mobile hardware catches up to desktops; most of the forced upgrades have been due to low RAM or other hardware deficiencies.
  - brymaster 13y ago
    Since you're being credulous, I'll bite: Just because it's "free" and you can update systems that are on Snow Leopard, doesn't mean it'll update all systems on Snow Leopard. For those paying attention, Apple killed off quite a bit of hardware with 10.8. Those certainly aren't upgradable to Mavericks.
    - arrrg 13y ago
      To call that planned obsolescence is completely ridiculous.
      - brymaster 13y ago
        It's not. All hardware has a planned lifecycle and it's just up to them to draw the line in the sand. They'll also do it through software updates by making less features available on the older model in order to compel you to upgrade to the newer. "AirPlay Mirroring" only available in Sandy Bridge or greater because of the usage of Intel QuickSync is an example of that. For any cocoa/obj-c dev that's dealt with constant deprecated API's on Mac, they know exactly what I'm talking about.
        cdcarter 13y ago
        > They'll also do it through software updates by making less features available on the older model in order to compel you to upgrade to the newer. "AirPlay Mirroring" only available in Sandy Bridge or greatest because of the usage of Intel QuickSync is an example of that. By your own admission that's not "in order to compel you to upgrade to the newer." That's because the newer hardware is required to make it work satisfactorily.
        brymaster 13y ago
        No, because third party alternatives like AirParrot or Beamer work just as well and without the hardware restriction.
        13y ago
  - badman_ting 13y ago
    Also, their OS upgrades are more expensive than everyone else's because their customers are idiot sheep easily fooled by flashy marketing. That's why this is so expensive.
- jared314 13y ago
  While they may be good to go, I still like waiting a week to upgrade apple products. They do occasionally break things important to my workflow. The last one for me was VirtualBox support along with the Xcode commandline tools. While workarounds and patches appear fairly quickly, it is prudent not to put myself out of action, potentially for days or weeks, if I can avoid it.
  - btian 13y ago
    It's always a good idea to create a smaller partition and install the new OS. Make sure that everything is working, then upgrade the main partition.
    - untog 13y ago
      Or just wait for someone else to try it. I'm not sure what anyone ever loses by waiting a week or so.
  - shadesandcolour 13y ago
    If you're concerned about application compatibility, you can check out RoaringApps. They have a new table for Mavericks compatibility. http://roaringapps.com/apps http://roaringapps.com/apps
- iambateman 13y ago
  Didn't Lion not support 2008 models? I think it's cool, and unusual, that they can now upgrade to Mavericks.
  - glogla 13y ago
    I'm running Lion on 2007 MacBook, so it should support 2008 models. The problem was with Mountain Lion, because it required 64-bit EFI (or something) which older models don't have.
  - Dan_Nguyen 13y ago
    My girlfriend uses a 2008 aluminum MB (non-Pro), and I never had any issues upgrading her to previous versions of OSX. Now it's running Mountain Lion and downloading Mavericks as I type.
    - iambateman 13y ago
      Nice. My 2008 black macbook wouldn't upgrade. But I went MacBook Air, which was great.
  - Turing_Machine 13y ago
    Depends on which model and when you bought it. If it's an iMac, you're good all the way back to mid-2007. Mac Pro needs to be early 2008 or later. Mac Mini needs to be early 2009 or later. If it won't run Lion/Mountain Lion, it won't run Mavericks either, unfortunately. Also note that some features (e.g., AirDrop) aren't available on older machines running Mountain Lion, even if the basic OS runs. I don't know if that's been changed for Mavericks.
- bluedino 13y ago
  I wonder what the technical reason is for not letting Leopard users upgrade. It seems like everyone I know with a 2008/2009 is still on 10.5.8
  - durin42 13y ago
    No app store in Leopard? If the MAS is the only distribution vector, there's a bootstrapping problem from 10.5 IIRC.
  - wtallis 13y ago
    10.5 doesn't support the Mac App Store. And, why would they put effort into testing the upgrade process from an OS that is only still used by people who never upgrade the OS?
  - tehwalrus 13y ago
    snow leopard was the first 64-bit only OS X. You couldn't allow all Leopard users to upgrade, so that's not what's in the press release. People may still be able to upgrade though, if they can work out how to install the App Store.
    - wtallis 13y ago
      Snow Leopard still supported 32-bit processors. Lion requires a 64-bit processor, and Mountain Lion requires 64-bit firmware.
      - tehwalrus 13y ago
        apologies - I remembered it wrong!
  - xenonite 13y ago
    The most technical reason for not offering an upgrade to all 10.5 users is: PowerPC-Architecture! 10.6 was the first Intel-Only OS X, and 10.5 the last one for PowerPCs.
    - 13y ago
- molsongolden 13y ago
  No luck for us 1st gen 2006 macbook users!
  - wiredfool 13y ago
    There was no luck on Lion or Mountain Lion either.
  - georgebarnett 13y ago
    Sadly the first Core Duo's were 32 bit. With that in mind, I can understand Apples motivation to move the whole line to 64 as soon as is possible.
    - andoriyu 13y ago
      Sadly first Core Duo's sucked so much that I spent way more time on G4 than on CD.
- aydoubleyou 13y ago
  Where can I find the list of models?
  - mfranzwa 13y ago
    http://www.apple.com/osx/specs/ http://www.apple.com/osx/specs/
  - mwcremer 13y ago
    http://www.apple.com/osx/specs/ http://www.apple.com/osx/specs/
    - acomjean 13y ago
      I'm always confused turning "mac late 2008" into the indetifier the mac system profiler reports: eg: Model Name: MacBook Model Identifier: MacBook7,1
  - mwcremer 13y ago
    http://www.apple.com/osx/specs/ http://www.apple.com/osx/specs/
- twoodfin 13y ago
  I'm hopeful I didn't misread the slide, and that the original Macbook Air will be supported. Not my primary laptop, but it'd be great to move up from Lion.
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
  - wtallis 13y ago
    Nope. The original MacBook Air used a shitty Intel GMA GPU. OS X 10.8 and later require a real GPU - NVidia, AMD, or Intel Sandy Bridge or newer.
  - shinratdr 13y ago
    10.8 didn't support that MBA, so I'm not sure why you would hope that 10.9 would suddenly reintroduce compatibility.
    - oneeyedpigeon 13y ago
      Maybe because the App Store requirements, rather strangely, say "OSX 10.6.8". I suspect that might well be why it's free - can't have lots of people paying for something they can't use, much easier to do the checks during installation than at POS, and there will be a LOT of compatibility issues with various machines on the cusp.
      - SyneRyder 13y ago
        I tried buying Mountain Lion on a machine that ran Lion but doesn't support ML, and the App Store does have hardware checks at point of sale. It won't let you buy/download it if your machine is incompatible.
- jonpeda 13y ago
  Does anyone have a 2007 MBP with a functioning battery?
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- easytiger 13y ago
  That's confusing, didn't they charge to upgrade to ML. Doesn't that then infer they should refund anyone who paid for an ML upgrade?
  - jasonlotito 13y ago
    Why? I got what they paid for. I don't feel slighted. I don't really understand how you can be confused.
panacea 13y ago
A boot to the face of Microsoft.
- Pxtl 13y ago
  Yup. They had trouble getting people to buy Windows 8 when it was $40.
  - CrazedGeek 13y ago
    Do you have a citation for that? I can't seem to find any sales information on the $40 promo.
    - eli 13y ago
      http://www.zdnet.com/microsoft-takes-no-prisoners-with-39-upgrade-price-7000000173/ http://www.zdnet.com/microsoft-takes-no-prisoners-with-39-up... The promotion has long since ended.
      - CrazedGeek 13y ago
        I knew it existed, but the claim was that Windows 8 sold poorly with the $40 promo, which I couldn't find any backing for. The only reference I could find for Win8 sales around that time said that "Upgrade sales [are] outpacing those of Windows 7 at the same point in its lifecycle": http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/11/windows-8-sales-are-good-if-not-great-at-40-million-copies-in-the-first-month/ http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/11/window...
- MrZongle2 13y ago
  No kidding. Not only will Apple get some good press for this (barring any major technical snafu) but they'll glean some additional community goodwill and drastically reduce the number of legacy OS X versions in the wild.
- camus2 13y ago
  OsX is not free, you still need to buy a Mac. As for MSFT , they are a software company,not sure what they can do about Windows price ,which will never be free. Want free stuff? use Linux.
smaili 13y ago
This is very significant because it has signaled a shift from a time where Operating Systems was once a major revenue stream. Very interested to see if Microsoft will follow suit.
- kvb 13y ago
  Was OS revenue ever a big source of income for Apple?
- uptown 13y ago
  "Very interested to see if Microsoft will follow suit." And what? Make it up in volume? Unless Microsoft's Surface sales take-off, they can't afford to give Windows away for free apart from what are essentially service-packs like the 8.1 update they just released.
  - scarmig 13y ago
    I thought Office, Exchange, etc. products actually formed the bulk of their revenue.
    - uptown 13y ago
      Windows is still a major component of their revenue: http://www.tannerhelland.com/4273/microsoft-money-updated-2012/ http://www.tannerhelland.com/4273/microsoft-money-updated-20...
  - vdaniuk 13y ago
    Make it up in Windows Store sales commissions? However, you are right, Windows is a cash cow that generates immense revenue to Microsoft.
  - corresation 13y ago
    And what? Make it up in volume? Just chiming in conversationally (not refuting anything), but Windows original ascension was entirely based on piracy -- Microsoft did nothing to stop home users from thieving Windows as it lubricated its use for business (and business could much more easily be convinced to spend, if not at the outset, once the infrastructure was in place and they suddenly worried about a disgruntled employee turn them in). And of course, Microsoft knows (and controls) the ecosystem more than anyone. Microsoft should be able to monetize users beyond just the operating system, but they are proving totally incompetent at doing that with home users.
josteink 13y ago
Right. Apple event today. What on earth compelled Nokia to launch their new Windows-tablet on the same day?
- pinaceae 13y ago
  they knew it's crap and wanted to bury it?
  - meepmorp 13y ago
    Dunno. I looked at an overview of the thing, and it seemed not too bad. Design looked nice, the battery in the keyboard cover thing seemed cool. I can't imagine buying over an iPad, but I could see where it might appeal to more MS oriented folks.
- jbigelow76 13y ago
  Nokia announced their event first. Two ways to read Apple then targeting the same day - For the Apple Fanboy: Apple wasn't even aware Nokia was releasing anything, because honestly, it's windows mobile so who cares, and this is pure coincidence. For the Msft Fanboy: Apple releases a sad, incremental improvement in hardware that isn't their primary focus anymore in an attempt to keep the attention off of a rival.
  - potatolicious 13y ago
    Or Apple knew, but it didn't affect their timing at all. Apple only announces on Tuesdays, and there are only 5 Tuesdays in October - and we've known this announcement was coming this month for a very, very long time. I sincerely doubt Apple gives one tiny hoot about Windows tablets when it comes to timing their announcements. A flagship Android tablet maybe.
  - tedunangst 13y ago
    Considering today's October 22 iPad announcement came 364 days after last year's October 23 iPad announcement, I'm going to guess Nokia's announcement wasn't a contributing factor for Apple's scheduling.
chm 13y ago
I own a 2008 15" MBP. I didn't want to upgrade from Snow Leopard - there seemed to be a synergy between SL and my hardware. Even for free, I'm weary of upgrading my OS. Too scared to take a performance hit.
- dilap 13y ago
  Recent releases of OS X, and probably this latest one too, have focused a lot on actually improving the efficiency of the OS. Can't know for sure w/o trying it, but I'd expect to get a performance improvement from the upgrade.
  - masklinn 13y ago
    Initial reports from the GM tell of many improvements, especially the memory subsystem which aside from the possibly gimmicky memory compression finally stopped sucking and swapping for no reason because it couldn't handle its own caches correctly. Users on even high-RAM configurations (16~32GB) which would still end up swapping in previous versions due to memleaks and memory mismanagement report 0 swapping.
- wonderyak 13y ago
  I love SL and I was really hesitant to upgrade to Lion. When I did, it was weird but I got over it. Lion and ML feel so much faster.
  - chm 13y ago
    I'm just worried that I'll be upgrading for eye-candy rather than increased power usability.
    - chm 13y ago
      Reading the review has convinced me to try it. I'll backup SL and download Mavericks next week!
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
kailuowang 13y ago
Does anyone know if this upgrade is worthwhile for software development?
- cmiles74 13y ago
  I would think it'd only make a big difference if you're developing targeting this newest release of OSX. There isn't a new XCode release at this time.[0] It is likely that the next XCode release will require Mavericks to run. [0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xcode#Version_history http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xcode#Version_history
- perishabledave 13y ago
  Battery life is said to increase an hour and the multiple screen monitor functionality has been improved. Nothing that would really change your development drastically. That being said it is a solid release and quite stable, I wouldn't see much reason not to upgrade.
- lukifer 13y ago
  For n=1: The 10.9 GM has been smooth as butter, didn't break any of my mac apps or *nix tools. Obviously double-check on any tools which are mission-critical, but I recommend it in general, a noticeably pleasant upgrade to usability, battery and performance.
qwerty_asdf 13y ago
So where can I go to download an ISO? I'd like to burn a bootable DVD, and load it up as a non-networked offline install. Is such a thing even possible?
- pat2man 13y ago
  There are a few tools that will do this for you, basically copying the hidden restore partition onto a USB stick. Bootable DVD though? Really?
  - barake 13y ago
    As of Mountain Lion, the recovery partition doesn't contain the full OS. Just enough to bootstrap and download the whole thing from Apple. They also do not sell the update on physical media (thumb drives, DVDs, etc.) in store.
  - qwerty_asdf 13y ago
    > Bootable DVD though? Really? In light of recent events involving the NSA and leaked documents, yes. A bootable DVD. Really. For some heavy-duty discussion on the withertos and wherefores, take a quick gander at a recent thread, over here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6532642 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6532642 Remember that part where GCHQ stormed the offices of The Guardian, and took an angle grinder to one of their laptops? http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/20/nsa-snowden-files-drives-destroyed-london http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/20/nsa-snowden-fil...
    - wtallis 13y ago
      Still, why not just use a USB drive? DVDs are painfully slow compared to flash drives.
    - falcolas 13y ago
      In light of the recent NSA revelations, I'd want to use Linux, not Mac, for an ephemeral offline OS. Of course, Schneider uses Windows, so to each his own.
ville 13y ago
Free as in free beer, not as in free speech.
- lukifer 13y ago
  Just give it up, and call it "liberated software" or something. Language is defined by usage, and no one outside the FOSS community thinks that's what "free" means. (And while we're at it, the media is never, ever going to adopt the word "cracker" either.)
  - lucasnemeth 13y ago
    free fre·er, fre·est, adverb, verb, freed, free·ing. adjective 1. enjoying personal rights or liberty, as a person who is not in slavery: a land of free people. 2. pertaining to or reserved for those who enjoy personal liberty: They were thankful to be living on free soil. 3. existing under, characterized by, or possessing civil and political liberties that are, as a rule, constitutionally guaranteed by representative government: the free nations of the world. 4. enjoying political autonomy, as a people or country not under foreign rule; independent. 5. exempt from external authority, interference, restriction, etc., as a person or one's will, thought, choice, action, etc.; independent; unrestricted.
    - lukifer 13y ago
      lit·er·al·ly 1. in a literal manner or sense; exactly. 2. used for emphasis or to express strong feeling while not being literally true. Words are literally defined by how they are actually used by humans over time. If I hold up a sign saying "Free Donuts", no one is going to think I mean that pastries should be liberated. To unnecessarily cling to the word "free" when it has a more obvious secondary meaning is to tilt at windmills; there is no shortage of synonyms.
      - tomflack 13y ago
        If there is one argument it's impossible to win, it's an argument with people trying to impose their own "original" or "traditional" word usage over the more colloquial understanding of it's meaning.
SeanLuke 13y ago
Wasn't there a McCain-Feingold rule which made free upgrades illegal that entangled Apple in the past? Edit: Sarbanes-Oxley, not McCain-Feingold. I had forgotten.
- masklinn 13y ago
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6593993 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6593993 > No. FASB changes revenue recognition principles in 2010 to allow this type of update.
- publicfig 13y ago
  I think you may be thinking of the Sarbanes–Oxley Act, which is what Apple cited for charging for some upgrades in the past (that and GAAP)[1]. If I remember correctly, things have changed on that level now, though I don't know if it's through legislation or through a reform of accounting practices [1]http://appleinsider.com/article/?id=2419 http://appleinsider.com/article/?id=2419
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
- crbnw00ts 13y ago
  Not any more. The rules were changed / clarified a few years ago: http://www.inc.com/guides/2010/11/how-to-comply-with-new-revenue-recognition-rules.html http://www.inc.com/guides/2010/11/how-to-comply-with-new-rev... Apple mentions their adoption of the rules in this press release (scroll down to "Retrospective Adoption of Amended Accounting Standards"): http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2010/01/25Apple-Reports-First-Quarter-Results.html http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2010/01/25Apple-Reports-Firs... That is how they've been able to give customers free iOS upgrades all this time without having to defer any revenue from the original sale of the hardware. They are apparently now applying the same practices to OS X software.
AsymetricCom 13y ago
I guess this one is on the NSA. Thanks guys!
Alex3917 13y ago
So can we now file a class action suit for all those times they told us it would be illegal to not charge a fee for upgrading?
- k2enemy 13y ago
  No. FASB changed revenue recognition principles in 2010 to allow this type of update.
  - millerm 13y ago
    Wow, great response! I was wondering when someone was going to bring that up.
D9u 13y ago
Real breakthrough would be for OS X to run on Windoze devices... If you're a distro hopping nixer there's nothing to see here... Move along.
- tomschlick 13y ago
  Yeah if by breakthrough you mean shits the bed. The reason OSX works so well is because Apple has a limited set of hardware they have to support vs the wild west of hardware that windows has to support.
  - D9u 13y ago
    No, by "breakthrough" I mean support common x86 devices, which OS X does support to a limited degree.
    - ctdonath 13y ago
      OS X exists entirely to facilitate selling more Apple hardware. Apple has zero interest in giving anyone a reason to buy anything other than Apple computers (broadly defined from Mac Pro to iPod Shuffle).
  - r00fus 13y ago
    Yes, Apple is a hardware manufacturer that happens to make it's own OS (something that Dell or Lenovo could do any day if they could get off the MSFT/INTC gravy train - by creating their own Linux distro). Switching models to compete with the Windows model is a mistake they were lucky to make once and live to tell about. They will not make that mistake again. If you're looking for competition against Microsoft, look to Google. Both of these companies aren't hardware companies at their heart, and both want manufacturers to bundle their OS. I'd say that if Microsoft had an ally, it would be Apple today (only in the sense that Apple doesn't care for Microsoft's business).
yeukhon 13y ago
Finally. There is almost no point if you are selling your OS for just $30, $40 dollars. I am going to wait a few months until I upgrade. Most of the software I use probably be better off with the current version.
ChikkaChiChi 13y ago
Some would say that Mavericks was launched for free because Windows 8.1 did the same. Those same people might also say that Apple did one better by offering the update for computers running older than the most recent version of their software.
- ctdonath 13y ago
  Offering it for older computers & versions indicates this was in the works long before MS released 8.1 out of urgency.
- danieldk 13y ago
  This has been coming a long time. The updates were already very cheap (20something Euros) compared to the old days (> 100 Euro if I remember correctly) and it fits in with the iOS strategy of having the latest version on every device. OS X upgrade revenue is now such a minuscule piece of the pie that it probably doesn't matter anymore.
  - masklinn 13y ago
    > the old days (> 100 Euro if I remember correctly) Yes, 129 for single-user and 169 for family (5-user). And these are not so old days, Leopard was 129 and that was in 2007. Snow Leopard and Lion were 30, and ML was 20 (in USD, IIRC $129 translated to 129€ but ML is "only" 18€)
  - eungyu 13y ago
    OS X Prices by Version - http://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/osx-prices@2x.png http://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/osx-pr...
  - dba7dba 13y ago
    It's just a bait and switch. Free OS X upgrade and yet charge 50% more for hardware than what's realistic/fair.
  - bsimpson 13y ago
    Apple's policy until System 7 was that you paid for the hardware and you should be able to expect software updates free for the life of the product. Nice to see them coming home, on this point anyway.
Zenst 13y ago
The whole free OS which can only run upon hardware they have already sold you is reminding me of how IBM used to sell AIX and moved into giving it away free as it would only run upon hardware only they made and sold you. Question is though, what about support. You have a 3 year old Mac of some flavour and upgrade to this OS, what about issues you may have. ANother aspect would be that by in effect making this level of OS available to all supported models out there warranty wise, they make life in supporting systems a little bit easier and very likely will drop support for the other older OS's on these models quicker. Again making life in support easier in many ways as well as making developers lives a lot easier. Especialy if they can target toward the a single denominator OS wise and take advantage of all the features without working towards only features common to the previous flavours. Either way a good move. Though can bet there will be somebody on the older flavour of OS who will have some essentual application that they must have which has issues. But time will tell. Good move on many levels I'd say by Apple.
- midgetjones 13y ago
  I think that it's most likely they want everyone on the latest OSX for the same reasons that it's good to have everyone on the latest iOS. Whatever they're planning, getting everyone on board is obviously an important part of that. I think the biggest thing over the last two keynotes is the iWork update - MS have been ridicuslously slow in the one area they could have won, which was bringing Office to iOS. I'm pretty sure this is the nail in the coffin.
  - sarreph 13y ago
    >Whatever they're planning You just wait...
    - yaddayadda 13y ago
      Wait for it ... [1] [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SqkYnfAhgy0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SqkYnfAhgy0
  - mturmon 13y ago
samstave 13y ago
Can anyone try running this in a virtualbox? Can anyone point me to an ISO of this?
frank_boyd 13y ago
Of course. The competition is already free and Apple has still a high security prison as far as the lock-in effect of its technology is concerned, so they're still safe.
jasoncartwright 13y ago
Here is the App Store link to upgrade now... https://itunes.apple.com/app/os-x-mavericks/id675248567?mt=12 https://itunes.apple.com/app/os-x-mavericks/id675248567?mt=1...
- corresation 13y ago
  Installed it on a Mac Mini (3rd gen i7) and after the install it sat on a blank screen (with mouse cursor), but a forced restart and all was perfect and everything is operating brilliantly. Fantastic treat that it is free.
  - aroch 13y ago
    Kernel Caches that aren't cleared properly will do this, the display drivers changes significantly and they're stored in PRAM
    - Zr40 13y ago
      That's definitely false. PRAM only contains firmware settings and boot parameters. It isn't big enough to contain drivers. If the display driver is at fault, grandparent wouldn't even see a mouse cursor. I don't know anything about 'properly cleaning the kernel caches', but it's clearly not a problem since grandparent was able to continue by rebooting.
      - aroch 13y ago
        PRAM stores a bootarg that boots off the current caches. There's an issue with DMProxy and the display drivers that causes the black screen + cursor issue described. Hardrebooting has the benefit of causing the magic in the EFI to supply a -f (ignore kernelcaches)
- neya 13y ago
  It should be worth noting that if you run Adobe's Creative Suite (version 6 and below), it has some compatibility problems for a number of users, including me[1] while running it on Mavericks. If your business depends on this software, I would advise you to wait for a few more months until these bugs are fixed. Overall, very excited! [1]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6538803 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6538803
saejox 13y ago
First i heard this i immidiately gone to apple.com/osx looked for iso download. Yes i am naive like that.
- D9u 13y ago
  We can download hundreds of fully functional iso for a myriad of unix-like systems... Why is it naive to expect Apple to follow suit? Is it their software which is so costly, or is it the hardware upon which that software runs?
trimbo 13y ago
I love how it's free for the "first time ever"... ... except before... I think it was... System 7.5? All new OSes used to be free for Mac and Apple II.
- masklinn 13y ago
  10.1 was also free for 10.0 users, though mostly because 10.0 wasn't really finished (some would argue 10.1 was not either)
- shinratdr 13y ago
  OS X is a seperate OS. Apple didn't say that this is the first time they had given away an OS. They said this is the first free OS X release. Which it is.
  - trimbo 13y ago
    "Today we're going to revolutionize pricing. Today we announce a new era for the Mac. Today we announce that Mavericks is free." This is a quote from the Verge's liveblog of an Apple guy. Note he said "Mac", which made me think of it.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
nandhp 13y ago
What about virtualization? Previously, one would only be allowed virtualize OS X if they purchased a copy (you can't virtualize the copy that came with the computer). Since it sounds like that's no longer an option, do I get virtualization for free now?
ucha 13y ago
It's definitely a great incentive for users to update their hardware. If you could still use iOS3 on your iPhone 3GS, it would be reasonably fast and responsive but because the upgrade to iOS6 is free, you go for it only to discover that it is now unusable. Same logic goes now for Macs.
- shinratdr 13y ago
  I think lack of app compatibility and broken websites would be a bigger incentive.
- krrrh 13y ago
  Check out whited00r if you Have an old 3GS that you want to make snappy. As for OSX, this update (like many in the past) has several features which rejuvenate older hardware. It does the opposite of what you claim.
beagle3 13y ago
As a recent Mac convert, who plans to do Mac software development but hasn't started yet - is there a way to copy the existing mountain lion install on my Mac to a VM image so I can test on ML after I upgrade to Mavericks?
- alexgaribay 13y ago
  With the latest version of VMWare fusion, you could probably do that.
- k-mcgrady 13y ago
  I haven't used it but I believe an app like SuperDuper can clone your drive and let you do that.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- itafroma 13y ago
  You can: I upgraded my Mountain Lion test machine to Mavericks when DP1 landed and created a Parallels virtual machine for Mountain Lion. However, I found—at least with Parallels—you can't just take an existing hard drive image and use that: you have to create a new virtual machine, install Mountain Lion from scratch on it, then use OS X's Migration Assistant to move everything over.
  - beagle3 13y ago
    Thanks. My Mac came with Mountain lion pre-installed; where can I find install media to install ML into parallels?
    - itafroma 13y ago
      You'll need to re-download it from the App Store (it should automatically be flagged as purchased, though, so you shouldn't need to re-buy it: just check the "Purchases" tab). It'll download as an application: "Install Mac OS X Mountain Lion.app". If the installer automatically launches, just quit out of it. Right-click on the application, select "Show package contents", then navigate to Contents/SharedSupport. In there, you'll see "InstalESD.dmg": that's the Mountain Lion image. You should be able to use that image directly in Parallels et al, but if you really wanted physical media, you can burn that image to a disc or create a bootable flash drive using Disk Utility. If you go the flash drive route, you'll need to use the GUID partition table.
wmeredith 13y ago
Jesus, between this and Android, Microsoft's cash cow has now been fully commoditized. Ouch.
- hkdobrev 13y ago
  Actually because of patents royalties Microsoft gets more money from Android than Windows Phone. Every sold Android phone is putting few bucks in MS pocket.
  - csense 13y ago
    Can you cite any sources for this?
    - millerm 13y ago
      Here are a couple (I only took a quick glance), as many articles pop up with a search: http://www.itworld.com/open-source/372628/microsoft-makes-big-money-android-phones-and-tablets http://www.itworld.com/open-source/372628/microsoft-makes-bi... http://allthingsd.com/20130718/microsofts-making-more-money-from-phones-but-much-of-that-could-be-from-android/ http://allthingsd.com/20130718/microsofts-making-more-money-...
  - josephlord 13y ago
    I think that the total Android revenue was greater than the total Windows Phone revenue quite a while ago. I don't know if it still holds true now that WinPho sales are more than a whisker over none.
- gaius 13y ago
  Because Pages and Numbers are free? Oh no, no no. You misunderstand how this works...
  - wmeredith 13y ago
    Jeez, it would sure be helpful if you would explain it to me, then. How worthless is this comment?
ndrake 13y ago
Anyone know what the JVM situation is on Mavericks? Does Apple still provide a version of 1.6 or would I be required to upgrade to Oracle's 1.7 install?
- ptomato 13y ago
  Attempting to use java directs you to here: http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/index.html http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/inde...
- ndrake 13y ago
  Finally got a chance to test this on a spare machine at work. Apple directs you to download Oracle's Java 7 installer, but I was able to download the recent 2013-005 update and install it on Mavericks. Seems to run fine. http://support.apple.com/kb/DL1572 http://support.apple.com/kb/DL1572
malandrew 13y ago
Hypothesis: Apple OS X is now knocking hard at the doors of the enterprise, and it's removing every barrier to entry except their main source of revenue, hardware costs. iWork is more than good enough for many MS Office use cases. If you work on documents that you often don't need to exchange with co-workers, then you don't really have any barriers to switching. Obviously, financial analysts with their massive models in excel aren't going anywhere anytime soon, but real estate agents like my mother and others like her have few reasons not to switch. Next time someone goes to upgrade office, they are going to have to compare an expensive software license with putting that money into a brand new computer instead and who doesn't love having a fresh new computer.
- nraynaud 13y ago
  I guess somehow they are already completely inside with the iDevices? I guess it's more seen as a push to avoid maintaining old software at high costs, and limiting fragmentation, by migrating as much people as possible. I guess the longevity of Windows XP must be seen as a scary thing. Also on a psychological level, the users get used to upgrade without too much fear. The company can retire the products sooner, flip the technology faster.
- Touche 13y ago
  iWork has potential because of iPads being moved into the enterprise, the OSX release is largely irrelevant (OSX is never going to be popular in the enterprise). Since they are doing iWorks web apps now, this gives people the ability to use iPads while they're on the road and then log into the same document from their Windows Office machine.
gdonelli 13y ago
...and the Developer Tools have always been free! I would say OS X is the best dev environment ever!
viseztrance 13y ago
It sounds great, but an OS upgrade shouldn't had been paid in the first place. For instance I would be pretty pissed off to pay to upgrade my phone's software. This is just a reminder that computers have become general consumer items.
- meepmorp 13y ago
  Would you apply that same logic to Windows? Say between 7 and 8?
  - viseztrance 13y ago
    If they can cope with the UI, absolutely. Computers are a commodity. Personally I know very few people that even upgrade windows. They just buy a new machine (which like their current machine, already comes with windows preinstalled).
    - meepmorp 13y ago
      Companies often buy Windows upgrades without new hardware. But basically, as long as you hold a license for an OS already, upgrades ought to be free?
netcan 13y ago
Seems like a sensible move and going with the flow. OS upgrades seem like a strange thing to pay for these days. It adds to the proposition first time macs converts. One downside is that paid software upgrades provide a useful feedback mechanism. It must get over the 'is this worth $100' bar to sell. I think this is probably important for iwork also. Between creating revenue vs enhancing the mac's value & pulling users deeper into Apple-land, I think the right decision could be to go free. OTOH, that would absolve iwork from having to be good enough that users choose to pay money for it. Still, free OS upgrades seem like the right choice.
mindo 13y ago
I would be just happy if it would be possible to upgrade, but I've tried 3 times the downloading keep crashing. I don't understand why they just don't make it so the updates would roll out on bittorrent like network. Its 5.29GB after all and every time it stops I would have like 1.6 - 3GB downloaded. And that is not to mention the download speeds that are just awful right now...
csense 13y ago
I haven't used any Apple machine since 2004. Some HN'ers like Apple, so I've been kind of interested to see what Apple machines do that PC's don't. But I don't want to pay premium prices for iGoods. Does this mean I can run the new OS in a VM to check out the Apple ecosystem? Or is this only free (as in beer) to people who have an existing paid license for a previous Apple operating system?
- Touche 13y ago
  You can't legally run an OSX VM on a non-Apple computer.
  - sarreph 13y ago
    FYI: http://www.lockergnome.com/osx/2012/02/24/are-hackintosh-computers-legal/ http://www.lockergnome.com/osx/2012/02/24/are-hackintosh-com...
    - nwhitehead 13y ago
      That article agrees with Touche, unless I'm missing something. EULA: "[you are free] to install, use and run up to two (2) additional copies or instances of the Apple Software within virtual operating system environments on each Mac Computer you own or control that is already running the Apple Software."
- georgemcbay 13y ago
  You don't need to have an existing paid license(1), but you do need to run it on Apple Mac hardware. Non-Apple hardware and VMs are not supported, don't work without some significant hacking and are forbidden by EULA. (1) Practically speaking if you have a machine capable of running this legally, you also have an existing paid license for MacOS, so this is mostly a theoretical difference.
  - sjmulder 13y ago
    Actually, you are allowed (and certainly able to) run OS X in up to two VMs. I installed 10.8 in VMware Fusion 5 and it was a breeze.
naicuoctavian 13y ago
This is part of a bigger company wide strategy to offer software updates for free for their products, a strategy they pioneered with iOs. There's also a huge difference in what each update adds when compared to 8.1 . Where 8.1 tries to fix all the initial issues with W8 (missing start button anyone?), Maverick adds serious new features (1+ hour of battery, compressed RAM). The free iWork suite is a direct attack to MSFT Office. Giving it away for free will pay long term in decreasing market share for Office. Office H&O is $220. Buy a Mac/iPhone/iPad and you get that for free.
- laureny 13y ago
  > This is part of a bigger company wide strategy to offer software updates for free for their products, a strategy they pioneered with iOs. Pioneered? Android updates have been free since day one.
  - naicuoctavian 13y ago
    June 2007: iPhone is released July 2008: iPhone OS 2.0 is released September 2008: Android 1.0 is released
malbs 13y ago
Damn disappointing to see I can't upgrade the Mac mini I have from ~2008. It's a Macmini2,1, but I have upgraded the ram from 500mb to 4gb (3gb addressable), the cpu to the fastest possible (2.3ghz core2), and a samsung 840 128gb ssd. The machine is a beast now, except for the fact the sound occasionally stops working (sudo killall coreaudiod!) I understand the why - the chipset/cpu is 32bit, and Mavericks is 64-bit only. Bit of a bugger. The user won't notice though (My wife) I'm sure the upgrade experience would be better than my Windows 8 -> Windows 8.1 experience of last week. The best way to describe that would be train wreck.
- jffry 13y ago
  When I went into MSFT's Store app on my Win8 VM and installed the 8.1 upgrade, it rebooted and then went through the entire first-time setup routine. Everything it wanted, was already configured, so asking me again is just a sloppy experience!
- newman314 13y ago
  This. From what I have been able to find, the CPU is perfectly 64bit capable but Apple has simply chosen not to release a compatible UEFI for it. Some enterprising folks have gotten things to work but it's veering into hackintosh territory.
hcarvalhoalves 13y ago
I believe they are offering this update for free since it's more about performance tweaks and library frameworks for app developers, not so much in terms of features or bundled apps, so it makes sense to have as much people as possible running it. Given OS X updates are a pretty streamlined process (and Time Machine helps in the case it borks something), I hope they keep this trend.
- DSingularity 13y ago
  Thats certainly a reason to offer it for a cheaper price. I think once you offer something free -- its hard to go back. I imagine it will tick off customers. So I dont think the incremental nature of OSX is the reason its free.
dba7dba 13y ago
I wish Apple sold OS upgrade at $100 or so and charge less for hardwares.
mustapha 13y ago
After perfecting the NSA OS with cloud based keychaining for easy access you can now be backdoored, free.
dlau1 13y ago
13 hours battery life now on my 11" 2013 macbook air, wow
shill 13y ago
I lost all notes in the Notes app after upgrading. The data file is still there but I'm not sure how to reattach it yet.
shurcooL 13y ago
This is the biggest reason this is awesome: Base SDK = 10.9 Minimum Deployment Target = 10.9
Tyrannosaurs 13y ago
Curious to know whether the fact that OS X is no longer a revenue stream might mean that Apple are more inclined to open it (or at least parts of it) up. As with a mobile OS, the services layer on top of the OS seems as important as the operating system itself. With so much of the value in owning a Mac being iLife, iWork, iCloud, maps, iTunes, the Appstore and so on, could Apple open up OS X in the way Android is open (by which I mean for inspection more than contribution and just the core, not the services)? Seems against their culture but this takes away one of the big reasons why they wouldn't.
- ranebo 13y ago
  No chance this will happen. All their software and services only have one purpose, to help sell more hardware. Thats where their money comes from.
free652 13y ago
May be a silly question. But did they put some any "lawyer" language to prevent hackintoshes from running maverick?

414 points by jdmitch 13y ago

mpg33 13y ago

s w e e t

ics 13y ago

If you're too busy to read the whole article or watch the keynote, also note that you can upgrade directly from Snow Leopard or later. They listed the hardware models which will take it as well– the 2007 Mac Minis and MacBook Pros are supposedly good to go.

arrrg 13y ago
Apple is all about that planned obsolescence, right!
- anologwintermut 13y ago
  That argument usually applied to iOS an their practices about non easily user repairable hardware.
  - arrrg 13y ago
    I’ve heard it made plenty times in reference to OS X (also iOS where they are really pushing the boundaries of the hardware to bring it to old devices). Every time a new version comes out, actually.
  - stcredzero 13y ago
    > That argument usually applied to iOS... That's been the traditional criticism against Apple and Mac seemingly forever. (User of Apples since Apple II+ and original Macintosh.)
  - ctdonath 13y ago
    Planned obsolescence has been Apple's standard operating procedure since the beginning.
    - Bud 13y ago
      Whatever. Is that why I've used my desktop Macs for an average of about 8 years before replacing them, and same with the laptops, at which time, I sold them, still working, to others?
      - enneff 13y ago
        Indeed. What about the Apple II/e and original Macintoshes remaining useful for a decade after their release?
- lukifer 13y ago
  It can still be planned obsolescence even if the plan is a good one. ;) Apple has always attempted to strike a balance between longevity and progress, especially on Macs (5-7 year lifespan, usually). iOS is faster-moving, and gets the shaft more often (2-3 years, sometimes less). The latter will hopefully get better as the mobile hardware catches up to desktops; most of the forced upgrades have been due to low RAM or other hardware deficiencies.
- brymaster 13y ago
  Since you're being credulous, I'll bite: Just because it's "free" and you can update systems that are on Snow Leopard, doesn't mean it'll update all systems on Snow Leopard. For those paying attention, Apple killed off quite a bit of hardware with 10.8. Those certainly aren't upgradable to Mavericks.
  - arrrg 13y ago
    To call that planned obsolescence is completely ridiculous.
    - brymaster 13y ago
      It's not. All hardware has a planned lifecycle and it's just up to them to draw the line in the sand. They'll also do it through software updates by making less features available on the older model in order to compel you to upgrade to the newer. "AirPlay Mirroring" only available in Sandy Bridge or greater because of the usage of Intel QuickSync is an example of that. For any cocoa/obj-c dev that's dealt with constant deprecated API's on Mac, they know exactly what I'm talking about.
      - cdcarter 13y ago
        > They'll also do it through software updates by making less features available on the older model in order to compel you to upgrade to the newer. "AirPlay Mirroring" only available in Sandy Bridge or greatest because of the usage of Intel QuickSync is an example of that. By your own admission that's not "in order to compel you to upgrade to the newer." That's because the newer hardware is required to make it work satisfactorily.
        brymaster 13y ago
        No, because third party alternatives like AirParrot or Beamer work just as well and without the hardware restriction.
        13y ago
- badman_ting 13y ago
  Also, their OS upgrades are more expensive than everyone else's because their customers are idiot sheep easily fooled by flashy marketing. That's why this is so expensive.
jared314 13y ago
While they may be good to go, I still like waiting a week to upgrade apple products. They do occasionally break things important to my workflow. The last one for me was VirtualBox support along with the Xcode commandline tools. While workarounds and patches appear fairly quickly, it is prudent not to put myself out of action, potentially for days or weeks, if I can avoid it.
- btian 13y ago
  It's always a good idea to create a smaller partition and install the new OS. Make sure that everything is working, then upgrade the main partition.
  - untog 13y ago
    Or just wait for someone else to try it. I'm not sure what anyone ever loses by waiting a week or so.
- shadesandcolour 13y ago
  If you're concerned about application compatibility, you can check out RoaringApps. They have a new table for Mavericks compatibility. http://roaringapps.com/apps http://roaringapps.com/apps
iambateman 13y ago
Didn't Lion not support 2008 models? I think it's cool, and unusual, that they can now upgrade to Mavericks.
- glogla 13y ago
  I'm running Lion on 2007 MacBook, so it should support 2008 models. The problem was with Mountain Lion, because it required 64-bit EFI (or something) which older models don't have.
- Dan_Nguyen 13y ago
  My girlfriend uses a 2008 aluminum MB (non-Pro), and I never had any issues upgrading her to previous versions of OSX. Now it's running Mountain Lion and downloading Mavericks as I type.
  - iambateman 13y ago
    Nice. My 2008 black macbook wouldn't upgrade. But I went MacBook Air, which was great.
- Turing_Machine 13y ago
  Depends on which model and when you bought it. If it's an iMac, you're good all the way back to mid-2007. Mac Pro needs to be early 2008 or later. Mac Mini needs to be early 2009 or later. If it won't run Lion/Mountain Lion, it won't run Mavericks either, unfortunately. Also note that some features (e.g., AirDrop) aren't available on older machines running Mountain Lion, even if the basic OS runs. I don't know if that's been changed for Mavericks.
bluedino 13y ago
I wonder what the technical reason is for not letting Leopard users upgrade. It seems like everyone I know with a 2008/2009 is still on 10.5.8
- durin42 13y ago
  No app store in Leopard? If the MAS is the only distribution vector, there's a bootstrapping problem from 10.5 IIRC.
- wtallis 13y ago
  10.5 doesn't support the Mac App Store. And, why would they put effort into testing the upgrade process from an OS that is only still used by people who never upgrade the OS?
- tehwalrus 13y ago
  snow leopard was the first 64-bit only OS X. You couldn't allow all Leopard users to upgrade, so that's not what's in the press release. People may still be able to upgrade though, if they can work out how to install the App Store.
  - wtallis 13y ago
    Snow Leopard still supported 32-bit processors. Lion requires a 64-bit processor, and Mountain Lion requires 64-bit firmware.
    - tehwalrus 13y ago
      apologies - I remembered it wrong!
- xenonite 13y ago
  The most technical reason for not offering an upgrade to all 10.5 users is: PowerPC-Architecture! 10.6 was the first Intel-Only OS X, and 10.5 the last one for PowerPCs.
  - 13y ago
molsongolden 13y ago
No luck for us 1st gen 2006 macbook users!
- wiredfool 13y ago
  There was no luck on Lion or Mountain Lion either.
- georgebarnett 13y ago
  Sadly the first Core Duo's were 32 bit. With that in mind, I can understand Apples motivation to move the whole line to 64 as soon as is possible.
  - andoriyu 13y ago
    Sadly first Core Duo's sucked so much that I spent way more time on G4 than on CD.
aydoubleyou 13y ago
Where can I find the list of models?
- mfranzwa 13y ago
  http://www.apple.com/osx/specs/ http://www.apple.com/osx/specs/
- mwcremer 13y ago
  http://www.apple.com/osx/specs/ http://www.apple.com/osx/specs/
  - acomjean 13y ago
    I'm always confused turning "mac late 2008" into the indetifier the mac system profiler reports: eg: Model Name: MacBook Model Identifier: MacBook7,1
- mwcremer 13y ago
  http://www.apple.com/osx/specs/ http://www.apple.com/osx/specs/
twoodfin 13y ago
I'm hopeful I didn't misread the slide, and that the original Macbook Air will be supported. Not my primary laptop, but it'd be great to move up from Lion.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- wtallis 13y ago
  Nope. The original MacBook Air used a shitty Intel GMA GPU. OS X 10.8 and later require a real GPU - NVidia, AMD, or Intel Sandy Bridge or newer.
- shinratdr 13y ago
  10.8 didn't support that MBA, so I'm not sure why you would hope that 10.9 would suddenly reintroduce compatibility.
  - oneeyedpigeon 13y ago
    Maybe because the App Store requirements, rather strangely, say "OSX 10.6.8". I suspect that might well be why it's free - can't have lots of people paying for something they can't use, much easier to do the checks during installation than at POS, and there will be a LOT of compatibility issues with various machines on the cusp.
    - SyneRyder 13y ago
      I tried buying Mountain Lion on a machine that ran Lion but doesn't support ML, and the App Store does have hardware checks at point of sale. It won't let you buy/download it if your machine is incompatible.
jonpeda 13y ago
Does anyone have a 2007 MBP with a functioning battery?
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
easytiger 13y ago
That's confusing, didn't they charge to upgrade to ML. Doesn't that then infer they should refund anyone who paid for an ML upgrade?
- jasonlotito 13y ago
  Why? I got what they paid for. I don't feel slighted. I don't really understand how you can be confused.

panacea 13y ago

A boot to the face of Microsoft.

Pxtl 13y ago
Yup. They had trouble getting people to buy Windows 8 when it was $40.
- CrazedGeek 13y ago
  Do you have a citation for that? I can't seem to find any sales information on the $40 promo.
  - eli 13y ago
    http://www.zdnet.com/microsoft-takes-no-prisoners-with-39-upgrade-price-7000000173/ http://www.zdnet.com/microsoft-takes-no-prisoners-with-39-up... The promotion has long since ended.
    - CrazedGeek 13y ago
      I knew it existed, but the claim was that Windows 8 sold poorly with the $40 promo, which I couldn't find any backing for. The only reference I could find for Win8 sales around that time said that "Upgrade sales [are] outpacing those of Windows 7 at the same point in its lifecycle": http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/11/windows-8-sales-are-good-if-not-great-at-40-million-copies-in-the-first-month/ http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/11/window...
MrZongle2 13y ago
No kidding. Not only will Apple get some good press for this (barring any major technical snafu) but they'll glean some additional community goodwill and drastically reduce the number of legacy OS X versions in the wild.
camus2 13y ago
OsX is not free, you still need to buy a Mac. As for MSFT , they are a software company,not sure what they can do about Windows price ,which will never be free. Want free stuff? use Linux.

smaili 13y ago

This is very significant because it has signaled a shift from a time where Operating Systems was once a major revenue stream. Very interested to see if Microsoft will follow suit.

kvb 13y ago
Was OS revenue ever a big source of income for Apple?
uptown 13y ago
"Very interested to see if Microsoft will follow suit." And what? Make it up in volume? Unless Microsoft's Surface sales take-off, they can't afford to give Windows away for free apart from what are essentially service-packs like the 8.1 update they just released.
- scarmig 13y ago
  I thought Office, Exchange, etc. products actually formed the bulk of their revenue.
  - uptown 13y ago
    Windows is still a major component of their revenue: http://www.tannerhelland.com/4273/microsoft-money-updated-2012/ http://www.tannerhelland.com/4273/microsoft-money-updated-20...
- vdaniuk 13y ago
  Make it up in Windows Store sales commissions? However, you are right, Windows is a cash cow that generates immense revenue to Microsoft.
- corresation 13y ago
  And what? Make it up in volume? Just chiming in conversationally (not refuting anything), but Windows original ascension was entirely based on piracy -- Microsoft did nothing to stop home users from thieving Windows as it lubricated its use for business (and business could much more easily be convinced to spend, if not at the outset, once the infrastructure was in place and they suddenly worried about a disgruntled employee turn them in). And of course, Microsoft knows (and controls) the ecosystem more than anyone. Microsoft should be able to monetize users beyond just the operating system, but they are proving totally incompetent at doing that with home users.

josteink 13y ago

Right. Apple event today. What on earth compelled Nokia to launch their new Windows-tablet on the same day?

pinaceae 13y ago
they knew it's crap and wanted to bury it?
- meepmorp 13y ago
  Dunno. I looked at an overview of the thing, and it seemed not too bad. Design looked nice, the battery in the keyboard cover thing seemed cool. I can't imagine buying over an iPad, but I could see where it might appeal to more MS oriented folks.
jbigelow76 13y ago
Nokia announced their event first. Two ways to read Apple then targeting the same day - For the Apple Fanboy: Apple wasn't even aware Nokia was releasing anything, because honestly, it's windows mobile so who cares, and this is pure coincidence. For the Msft Fanboy: Apple releases a sad, incremental improvement in hardware that isn't their primary focus anymore in an attempt to keep the attention off of a rival.
- potatolicious 13y ago
  Or Apple knew, but it didn't affect their timing at all. Apple only announces on Tuesdays, and there are only 5 Tuesdays in October - and we've known this announcement was coming this month for a very, very long time. I sincerely doubt Apple gives one tiny hoot about Windows tablets when it comes to timing their announcements. A flagship Android tablet maybe.
- tedunangst 13y ago
  Considering today's October 22 iPad announcement came 364 days after last year's October 23 iPad announcement, I'm going to guess Nokia's announcement wasn't a contributing factor for Apple's scheduling.

chm 13y ago

I own a 2008 15" MBP. I didn't want to upgrade from Snow Leopard - there seemed to be a synergy between SL and my hardware. Even for free, I'm weary of upgrading my OS. Too scared to take a performance hit.

dilap 13y ago
Recent releases of OS X, and probably this latest one too, have focused a lot on actually improving the efficiency of the OS. Can't know for sure w/o trying it, but I'd expect to get a performance improvement from the upgrade.
- masklinn 13y ago
  Initial reports from the GM tell of many improvements, especially the memory subsystem which aside from the possibly gimmicky memory compression finally stopped sucking and swapping for no reason because it couldn't handle its own caches correctly. Users on even high-RAM configurations (16~32GB) which would still end up swapping in previous versions due to memleaks and memory mismanagement report 0 swapping.
wonderyak 13y ago
I love SL and I was really hesitant to upgrade to Lion. When I did, it was weird but I got over it. Lion and ML feel so much faster.
- chm 13y ago
  I'm just worried that I'll be upgrading for eye-candy rather than increased power usability.
  - chm 13y ago
    Reading the review has convinced me to try it. I'll backup SL and download Mavericks next week!

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

kailuowang 13y ago

Does anyone know if this upgrade is worthwhile for software development?

cmiles74 13y ago
I would think it'd only make a big difference if you're developing targeting this newest release of OSX. There isn't a new XCode release at this time.[0] It is likely that the next XCode release will require Mavericks to run. [0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xcode#Version_history http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xcode#Version_history
perishabledave 13y ago
Battery life is said to increase an hour and the multiple screen monitor functionality has been improved. Nothing that would really change your development drastically. That being said it is a solid release and quite stable, I wouldn't see much reason not to upgrade.
lukifer 13y ago
For n=1: The 10.9 GM has been smooth as butter, didn't break any of my mac apps or *nix tools. Obviously double-check on any tools which are mission-critical, but I recommend it in general, a noticeably pleasant upgrade to usability, battery and performance.

qwerty_asdf 13y ago

So where can I go to download an ISO? I'd like to burn a bootable DVD, and load it up as a non-networked offline install. Is such a thing even possible?

pat2man 13y ago
There are a few tools that will do this for you, basically copying the hidden restore partition onto a USB stick. Bootable DVD though? Really?
- barake 13y ago
  As of Mountain Lion, the recovery partition doesn't contain the full OS. Just enough to bootstrap and download the whole thing from Apple. They also do not sell the update on physical media (thumb drives, DVDs, etc.) in store.
- qwerty_asdf 13y ago
  > Bootable DVD though? Really? In light of recent events involving the NSA and leaked documents, yes. A bootable DVD. Really. For some heavy-duty discussion on the withertos and wherefores, take a quick gander at a recent thread, over here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6532642 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6532642 Remember that part where GCHQ stormed the offices of The Guardian, and took an angle grinder to one of their laptops? http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/20/nsa-snowden-files-drives-destroyed-london http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/20/nsa-snowden-fil...
  - wtallis 13y ago
    Still, why not just use a USB drive? DVDs are painfully slow compared to flash drives.
  - falcolas 13y ago
    In light of the recent NSA revelations, I'd want to use Linux, not Mac, for an ephemeral offline OS. Of course, Schneider uses Windows, so to each his own.

ville 13y ago

Free as in free beer, not as in free speech.

lukifer 13y ago
Just give it up, and call it "liberated software" or something. Language is defined by usage, and no one outside the FOSS community thinks that's what "free" means. (And while we're at it, the media is never, ever going to adopt the word "cracker" either.)
- lucasnemeth 13y ago
  free fre·er, fre·est, adverb, verb, freed, free·ing. adjective 1. enjoying personal rights or liberty, as a person who is not in slavery: a land of free people. 2. pertaining to or reserved for those who enjoy personal liberty: They were thankful to be living on free soil. 3. existing under, characterized by, or possessing civil and political liberties that are, as a rule, constitutionally guaranteed by representative government: the free nations of the world. 4. enjoying political autonomy, as a people or country not under foreign rule; independent. 5. exempt from external authority, interference, restriction, etc., as a person or one's will, thought, choice, action, etc.; independent; unrestricted.
  - lukifer 13y ago
    lit·er·al·ly 1. in a literal manner or sense; exactly. 2. used for emphasis or to express strong feeling while not being literally true. Words are literally defined by how they are actually used by humans over time. If I hold up a sign saying "Free Donuts", no one is going to think I mean that pastries should be liberated. To unnecessarily cling to the word "free" when it has a more obvious secondary meaning is to tilt at windmills; there is no shortage of synonyms.
    - tomflack 13y ago
      If there is one argument it's impossible to win, it's an argument with people trying to impose their own "original" or "traditional" word usage over the more colloquial understanding of it's meaning.

SeanLuke 13y ago

Wasn't there a McCain-Feingold rule which made free upgrades illegal that entangled Apple in the past? Edit: Sarbanes-Oxley, not McCain-Feingold. I had forgotten.

masklinn 13y ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6593993 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6593993 > No. FASB changes revenue recognition principles in 2010 to allow this type of update.
publicfig 13y ago
I think you may be thinking of the Sarbanes–Oxley Act, which is what Apple cited for charging for some upgrades in the past (that and GAAP)[1]. If I remember correctly, things have changed on that level now, though I don't know if it's through legislation or through a reform of accounting practices [1]http://appleinsider.com/article/?id=2419 http://appleinsider.com/article/?id=2419
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
crbnw00ts 13y ago
Not any more. The rules were changed / clarified a few years ago: http://www.inc.com/guides/2010/11/how-to-comply-with-new-revenue-recognition-rules.html http://www.inc.com/guides/2010/11/how-to-comply-with-new-rev... Apple mentions their adoption of the rules in this press release (scroll down to "Retrospective Adoption of Amended Accounting Standards"): http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2010/01/25Apple-Reports-First-Quarter-Results.html http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2010/01/25Apple-Reports-Firs... That is how they've been able to give customers free iOS upgrades all this time without having to defer any revenue from the original sale of the hardware. They are apparently now applying the same practices to OS X software.

AsymetricCom 13y ago

I guess this one is on the NSA. Thanks guys!

Alex3917 13y ago

So can we now file a class action suit for all those times they told us it would be illegal to not charge a fee for upgrading?

k2enemy 13y ago
No. FASB changed revenue recognition principles in 2010 to allow this type of update.
- millerm 13y ago
  Wow, great response! I was wondering when someone was going to bring that up.

D9u 13y ago

Real breakthrough would be for OS X to run on Windoze devices... If you're a distro hopping nixer there's nothing to see here... Move along.

tomschlick 13y ago
Yeah if by breakthrough you mean shits the bed. The reason OSX works so well is because Apple has a limited set of hardware they have to support vs the wild west of hardware that windows has to support.
- D9u 13y ago
  No, by "breakthrough" I mean support common x86 devices, which OS X does support to a limited degree.
  - ctdonath 13y ago
    OS X exists entirely to facilitate selling more Apple hardware. Apple has zero interest in giving anyone a reason to buy anything other than Apple computers (broadly defined from Mac Pro to iPod Shuffle).
- r00fus 13y ago
  Yes, Apple is a hardware manufacturer that happens to make it's own OS (something that Dell or Lenovo could do any day if they could get off the MSFT/INTC gravy train - by creating their own Linux distro). Switching models to compete with the Windows model is a mistake they were lucky to make once and live to tell about. They will not make that mistake again. If you're looking for competition against Microsoft, look to Google. Both of these companies aren't hardware companies at their heart, and both want manufacturers to bundle their OS. I'd say that if Microsoft had an ally, it would be Apple today (only in the sense that Apple doesn't care for Microsoft's business).

yeukhon 13y ago

Finally. There is almost no point if you are selling your OS for just $30, $40 dollars. I am going to wait a few months until I upgrade. Most of the software I use probably be better off with the current version.

ChikkaChiChi 13y ago

Some would say that Mavericks was launched for free because Windows 8.1 did the same. Those same people might also say that Apple did one better by offering the update for computers running older than the most recent version of their software.

ctdonath 13y ago
Offering it for older computers & versions indicates this was in the works long before MS released 8.1 out of urgency.
danieldk 13y ago
This has been coming a long time. The updates were already very cheap (20something Euros) compared to the old days (> 100 Euro if I remember correctly) and it fits in with the iOS strategy of having the latest version on every device. OS X upgrade revenue is now such a minuscule piece of the pie that it probably doesn't matter anymore.
- masklinn 13y ago
  > the old days (> 100 Euro if I remember correctly) Yes, 129 for single-user and 169 for family (5-user). And these are not so old days, Leopard was 129 and that was in 2007. Snow Leopard and Lion were 30, and ML was 20 (in USD, IIRC $129 translated to 129€ but ML is "only" 18€)
- eungyu 13y ago
  OS X Prices by Version - http://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/osx-prices@2x.png http://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/osx-pr...
- dba7dba 13y ago
  It's just a bait and switch. Free OS X upgrade and yet charge 50% more for hardware than what's realistic/fair.
- bsimpson 13y ago
  Apple's policy until System 7 was that you paid for the hardware and you should be able to expect software updates free for the life of the product. Nice to see them coming home, on this point anyway.

Zenst 13y ago

The whole free OS which can only run upon hardware they have already sold you is reminding me of how IBM used to sell AIX and moved into giving it away free as it would only run upon hardware only they made and sold you. Question is though, what about support. You have a 3 year old Mac of some flavour and upgrade to this OS, what about issues you may have. ANother aspect would be that by in effect making this level of OS available to all supported models out there warranty wise, they make life in supporting systems a little bit easier and very likely will drop support for the other older OS's on these models quicker. Again making life in support easier in many ways as well as making developers lives a lot easier. Especialy if they can target toward the a single denominator OS wise and take advantage of all the features without working towards only features common to the previous flavours. Either way a good move. Though can bet there will be somebody on the older flavour of OS who will have some essentual application that they must have which has issues. But time will tell. Good move on many levels I'd say by Apple.

midgetjones 13y ago
I think that it's most likely they want everyone on the latest OSX for the same reasons that it's good to have everyone on the latest iOS. Whatever they're planning, getting everyone on board is obviously an important part of that. I think the biggest thing over the last two keynotes is the iWork update - MS have been ridicuslously slow in the one area they could have won, which was bringing Office to iOS. I'm pretty sure this is the nail in the coffin.
- sarreph 13y ago
  >Whatever they're planning You just wait...
  - yaddayadda 13y ago
    Wait for it ... [1] [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SqkYnfAhgy0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SqkYnfAhgy0
- mturmon 13y ago

samstave 13y ago

Can anyone try running this in a virtualbox? Can anyone point me to an ISO of this?

frank_boyd 13y ago

Of course. The competition is already free and Apple has still a high security prison as far as the lock-in effect of its technology is concerned, so they're still safe.

jasoncartwright 13y ago

Here is the App Store link to upgrade now... https://itunes.apple.com/app/os-x-mavericks/id675248567?mt=12 https://itunes.apple.com/app/os-x-mavericks/id675248567?mt=1...

corresation 13y ago
Installed it on a Mac Mini (3rd gen i7) and after the install it sat on a blank screen (with mouse cursor), but a forced restart and all was perfect and everything is operating brilliantly. Fantastic treat that it is free.
- aroch 13y ago
  Kernel Caches that aren't cleared properly will do this, the display drivers changes significantly and they're stored in PRAM
  - Zr40 13y ago
    That's definitely false. PRAM only contains firmware settings and boot parameters. It isn't big enough to contain drivers. If the display driver is at fault, grandparent wouldn't even see a mouse cursor. I don't know anything about 'properly cleaning the kernel caches', but it's clearly not a problem since grandparent was able to continue by rebooting.
    - aroch 13y ago
      PRAM stores a bootarg that boots off the current caches. There's an issue with DMProxy and the display drivers that causes the black screen + cursor issue described. Hardrebooting has the benefit of causing the magic in the EFI to supply a -f (ignore kernelcaches)
neya 13y ago
It should be worth noting that if you run Adobe's Creative Suite (version 6 and below), it has some compatibility problems for a number of users, including me[1] while running it on Mavericks. If your business depends on this software, I would advise you to wait for a few more months until these bugs are fixed. Overall, very excited! [1]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6538803 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6538803

saejox 13y ago

First i heard this i immidiately gone to apple.com/osx looked for iso download. Yes i am naive like that.

D9u 13y ago
We can download hundreds of fully functional iso for a myriad of unix-like systems... Why is it naive to expect Apple to follow suit? Is it their software which is so costly, or is it the hardware upon which that software runs?

trimbo 13y ago

I love how it's free for the "first time ever"... ... except before... I think it was... System 7.5? All new OSes used to be free for Mac and Apple II.

masklinn 13y ago
10.1 was also free for 10.0 users, though mostly because 10.0 wasn't really finished (some would argue 10.1 was not either)
shinratdr 13y ago
OS X is a seperate OS. Apple didn't say that this is the first time they had given away an OS. They said this is the first free OS X release. Which it is.
- trimbo 13y ago
  "Today we're going to revolutionize pricing. Today we announce a new era for the Mac. Today we announce that Mavericks is free." This is a quote from the Verge's liveblog of an Apple guy. Note he said "Mac", which made me think of it.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

nandhp 13y ago

What about virtualization? Previously, one would only be allowed virtualize OS X if they purchased a copy (you can't virtualize the copy that came with the computer). Since it sounds like that's no longer an option, do I get virtualization for free now?

ucha 13y ago

It's definitely a great incentive for users to update their hardware. If you could still use iOS3 on your iPhone 3GS, it would be reasonably fast and responsive but because the upgrade to iOS6 is free, you go for it only to discover that it is now unusable. Same logic goes now for Macs.

shinratdr 13y ago
I think lack of app compatibility and broken websites would be a bigger incentive.
krrrh 13y ago
Check out whited00r if you Have an old 3GS that you want to make snappy. As for OSX, this update (like many in the past) has several features which rejuvenate older hardware. It does the opposite of what you claim.

beagle3 13y ago

As a recent Mac convert, who plans to do Mac software development but hasn't started yet - is there a way to copy the existing mountain lion install on my Mac to a VM image so I can test on ML after I upgrade to Mavericks?

alexgaribay 13y ago
With the latest version of VMWare fusion, you could probably do that.
k-mcgrady 13y ago
I haven't used it but I believe an app like SuperDuper can clone your drive and let you do that.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
itafroma 13y ago
You can: I upgraded my Mountain Lion test machine to Mavericks when DP1 landed and created a Parallels virtual machine for Mountain Lion. However, I found—at least with Parallels—you can't just take an existing hard drive image and use that: you have to create a new virtual machine, install Mountain Lion from scratch on it, then use OS X's Migration Assistant to move everything over.
- beagle3 13y ago
  Thanks. My Mac came with Mountain lion pre-installed; where can I find install media to install ML into parallels?
  - itafroma 13y ago
    You'll need to re-download it from the App Store (it should automatically be flagged as purchased, though, so you shouldn't need to re-buy it: just check the "Purchases" tab). It'll download as an application: "Install Mac OS X Mountain Lion.app". If the installer automatically launches, just quit out of it. Right-click on the application, select "Show package contents", then navigate to Contents/SharedSupport. In there, you'll see "InstalESD.dmg": that's the Mountain Lion image. You should be able to use that image directly in Parallels et al, but if you really wanted physical media, you can burn that image to a disc or create a bootable flash drive using Disk Utility. If you go the flash drive route, you'll need to use the GUID partition table.

wmeredith 13y ago

Jesus, between this and Android, Microsoft's cash cow has now been fully commoditized. Ouch.

hkdobrev 13y ago
Actually because of patents royalties Microsoft gets more money from Android than Windows Phone. Every sold Android phone is putting few bucks in MS pocket.
- csense 13y ago
  Can you cite any sources for this?
  - millerm 13y ago
    Here are a couple (I only took a quick glance), as many articles pop up with a search: http://www.itworld.com/open-source/372628/microsoft-makes-big-money-android-phones-and-tablets http://www.itworld.com/open-source/372628/microsoft-makes-bi... http://allthingsd.com/20130718/microsofts-making-more-money-from-phones-but-much-of-that-could-be-from-android/ http://allthingsd.com/20130718/microsofts-making-more-money-...
- josephlord 13y ago
  I think that the total Android revenue was greater than the total Windows Phone revenue quite a while ago. I don't know if it still holds true now that WinPho sales are more than a whisker over none.
gaius 13y ago
Because Pages and Numbers are free? Oh no, no no. You misunderstand how this works...
- wmeredith 13y ago
  Jeez, it would sure be helpful if you would explain it to me, then. How worthless is this comment?

ndrake 13y ago

Anyone know what the JVM situation is on Mavericks? Does Apple still provide a version of 1.6 or would I be required to upgrade to Oracle's 1.7 install?

ptomato 13y ago
Attempting to use java directs you to here: http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/index.html http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/inde...
ndrake 13y ago
Finally got a chance to test this on a spare machine at work. Apple directs you to download Oracle's Java 7 installer, but I was able to download the recent 2013-005 update and install it on Mavericks. Seems to run fine. http://support.apple.com/kb/DL1572 http://support.apple.com/kb/DL1572

malandrew 13y ago

Hypothesis: Apple OS X is now knocking hard at the doors of the enterprise, and it's removing every barrier to entry except their main source of revenue, hardware costs. iWork is more than good enough for many MS Office use cases. If you work on documents that you often don't need to exchange with co-workers, then you don't really have any barriers to switching. Obviously, financial analysts with their massive models in excel aren't going anywhere anytime soon, but real estate agents like my mother and others like her have few reasons not to switch. Next time someone goes to upgrade office, they are going to have to compare an expensive software license with putting that money into a brand new computer instead and who doesn't love having a fresh new computer.

nraynaud 13y ago
I guess somehow they are already completely inside with the iDevices? I guess it's more seen as a push to avoid maintaining old software at high costs, and limiting fragmentation, by migrating as much people as possible. I guess the longevity of Windows XP must be seen as a scary thing. Also on a psychological level, the users get used to upgrade without too much fear. The company can retire the products sooner, flip the technology faster.
Touche 13y ago
iWork has potential because of iPads being moved into the enterprise, the OSX release is largely irrelevant (OSX is never going to be popular in the enterprise). Since they are doing iWorks web apps now, this gives people the ability to use iPads while they're on the road and then log into the same document from their Windows Office machine.

gdonelli 13y ago

...and the Developer Tools have always been free! I would say OS X is the best dev environment ever!

viseztrance 13y ago

It sounds great, but an OS upgrade shouldn't had been paid in the first place. For instance I would be pretty pissed off to pay to upgrade my phone's software. This is just a reminder that computers have become general consumer items.

meepmorp 13y ago
Would you apply that same logic to Windows? Say between 7 and 8?
- viseztrance 13y ago
  If they can cope with the UI, absolutely. Computers are a commodity. Personally I know very few people that even upgrade windows. They just buy a new machine (which like their current machine, already comes with windows preinstalled).
  - meepmorp 13y ago
    Companies often buy Windows upgrades without new hardware. But basically, as long as you hold a license for an OS already, upgrades ought to be free?

netcan 13y ago

Seems like a sensible move and going with the flow. OS upgrades seem like a strange thing to pay for these days. It adds to the proposition first time macs converts. One downside is that paid software upgrades provide a useful feedback mechanism. It must get over the 'is this worth $100' bar to sell. I think this is probably important for iwork also. Between creating revenue vs enhancing the mac's value & pulling users deeper into Apple-land, I think the right decision could be to go free. OTOH, that would absolve iwork from having to be good enough that users choose to pay money for it. Still, free OS upgrades seem like the right choice.

mindo 13y ago

I would be just happy if it would be possible to upgrade, but I've tried 3 times the downloading keep crashing. I don't understand why they just don't make it so the updates would roll out on bittorrent like network. Its 5.29GB after all and every time it stops I would have like 1.6 - 3GB downloaded. And that is not to mention the download speeds that are just awful right now...

csense 13y ago

I haven't used any Apple machine since 2004. Some HN'ers like Apple, so I've been kind of interested to see what Apple machines do that PC's don't. But I don't want to pay premium prices for iGoods. Does this mean I can run the new OS in a VM to check out the Apple ecosystem? Or is this only free (as in beer) to people who have an existing paid license for a previous Apple operating system?

Touche 13y ago
You can't legally run an OSX VM on a non-Apple computer.
- sarreph 13y ago
  FYI: http://www.lockergnome.com/osx/2012/02/24/are-hackintosh-computers-legal/ http://www.lockergnome.com/osx/2012/02/24/are-hackintosh-com...
  - nwhitehead 13y ago
    That article agrees with Touche, unless I'm missing something. EULA: "[you are free] to install, use and run up to two (2) additional copies or instances of the Apple Software within virtual operating system environments on each Mac Computer you own or control that is already running the Apple Software."
georgemcbay 13y ago
You don't need to have an existing paid license(1), but you do need to run it on Apple Mac hardware. Non-Apple hardware and VMs are not supported, don't work without some significant hacking and are forbidden by EULA. (1) Practically speaking if you have a machine capable of running this legally, you also have an existing paid license for MacOS, so this is mostly a theoretical difference.
- sjmulder 13y ago
  Actually, you are allowed (and certainly able to) run OS X in up to two VMs. I installed 10.8 in VMware Fusion 5 and it was a breeze.

naicuoctavian 13y ago

This is part of a bigger company wide strategy to offer software updates for free for their products, a strategy they pioneered with iOs. There's also a huge difference in what each update adds when compared to 8.1 . Where 8.1 tries to fix all the initial issues with W8 (missing start button anyone?), Maverick adds serious new features (1+ hour of battery, compressed RAM). The free iWork suite is a direct attack to MSFT Office. Giving it away for free will pay long term in decreasing market share for Office. Office H&O is $220. Buy a Mac/iPhone/iPad and you get that for free.

laureny 13y ago
> This is part of a bigger company wide strategy to offer software updates for free for their products, a strategy they pioneered with iOs. Pioneered? Android updates have been free since day one.
- naicuoctavian 13y ago
  June 2007: iPhone is released July 2008: iPhone OS 2.0 is released September 2008: Android 1.0 is released

malbs 13y ago

Damn disappointing to see I can't upgrade the Mac mini I have from ~2008. It's a Macmini2,1, but I have upgraded the ram from 500mb to 4gb (3gb addressable), the cpu to the fastest possible (2.3ghz core2), and a samsung 840 128gb ssd. The machine is a beast now, except for the fact the sound occasionally stops working (sudo killall coreaudiod!) I understand the why - the chipset/cpu is 32bit, and Mavericks is 64-bit only. Bit of a bugger. The user won't notice though (My wife) I'm sure the upgrade experience would be better than my Windows 8 -> Windows 8.1 experience of last week. The best way to describe that would be train wreck.

jffry 13y ago
When I went into MSFT's Store app on my Win8 VM and installed the 8.1 upgrade, it rebooted and then went through the entire first-time setup routine. Everything it wanted, was already configured, so asking me again is just a sloppy experience!
newman314 13y ago
This. From what I have been able to find, the CPU is perfectly 64bit capable but Apple has simply chosen not to release a compatible UEFI for it. Some enterprising folks have gotten things to work but it's veering into hackintosh territory.

hcarvalhoalves 13y ago

I believe they are offering this update for free since it's more about performance tweaks and library frameworks for app developers, not so much in terms of features or bundled apps, so it makes sense to have as much people as possible running it. Given OS X updates are a pretty streamlined process (and Time Machine helps in the case it borks something), I hope they keep this trend.

DSingularity 13y ago
Thats certainly a reason to offer it for a cheaper price. I think once you offer something free -- its hard to go back. I imagine it will tick off customers. So I dont think the incremental nature of OSX is the reason its free.

dba7dba 13y ago

I wish Apple sold OS upgrade at $100 or so and charge less for hardwares.

mustapha 13y ago

After perfecting the NSA OS with cloud based keychaining for easy access you can now be backdoored, free.

dlau1 13y ago

13 hours battery life now on my 11" 2013 macbook air, wow

shill 13y ago

I lost all notes in the Notes app after upgrading. The data file is still there but I'm not sure how to reattach it yet.

shurcooL 13y ago

This is the biggest reason this is awesome: Base SDK = 10.9 Minimum Deployment Target = 10.9

Tyrannosaurs 13y ago

Curious to know whether the fact that OS X is no longer a revenue stream might mean that Apple are more inclined to open it (or at least parts of it) up. As with a mobile OS, the services layer on top of the OS seems as important as the operating system itself. With so much of the value in owning a Mac being iLife, iWork, iCloud, maps, iTunes, the Appstore and so on, could Apple open up OS X in the way Android is open (by which I mean for inspection more than contribution and just the core, not the services)? Seems against their culture but this takes away one of the big reasons why they wouldn't.

ranebo 13y ago
No chance this will happen. All their software and services only have one purpose, to help sell more hardware. Thats where their money comes from.

free652 13y ago

May be a silly question. But did they put some any "lawyer" language to prevent hackintoshes from running maverick?