Did Leopard Rush to Make the Holiday Vista Missed?

Microsoft made the hard economic decision, which in retrospect probably was the wrong one (more on that in a few paragraphs). The unthinkable: Vista missed holiday season 2006, because Microsoft said Windows XP's successor wouldn't be ready in time.

From an economic perspective, October was about as late as Apple could release Leopard and still catch the tailwinds from holiday sales. The first sales wind will come from upgraders and the second from new Macs sold from Black Friday through Dec. 31. Leopard will make holiday 2007, but I question whether it's really ready.

I've been testing Mac OS X 10.5 on three Macs, one a MacBook Pro, all with Intel processors. There's something about Leopard that feels unfinished, like it left the den before reaching full maturity. On Saturday, I installed Leopard as upgrades on the three computers, and glitches have occurred on them all. I chose the upgrade option, rather than a clean install, as that's what I expect typical buyers to do.

The number of hiccups—and program crashes—is surprising for a Mac operating system. There are plenty of application incompatibilities, too. For example, Adobe has acknowledged compatibility problems between Lightroom 1.2 and Leopard; an update is expected in a few weeks.

Numerous Web forums are bulging with complaints about installation and compatibility problems and user interface changes (yeah, black text on dark gray was a really smart decision).

One of Leopard's most touted new features is backup application Time Machine. There's a long thread at the Apple support forums discussing success with a first backup but failure for those that followed.

The thread on installation problems is quite lively, given the amount of frustration some Leopard users express. Warned one: "You should never, never use the 'upgrade' option when installing a .0 release." Lamented another, "Nothing but problems with Leopard, going back to Tiger." I share the sentiment, but need to continue testing Leopard.

Another commenter, who complained of Leopard performance problems, attacked Office 2007 and used it to raise concerns about UI changes: "There was no reason to put all the crap in it that [Microsoft] did, and redesign an otherwise very good interface. I fear that this same thing is coming to both [to] Windows and Apple operating system software. Why oh why can't developers stick with what they have and improve on it, making it more secure, more stable, instead of rewriting it altogether?"

The same commenter complained about irksome operating similarities: "I am beginning to view Leopard much the same way I have viewed Vista over the months that I have had it." The context was complaints about Leopard performance. This commenter voiced sentiments similar to mine.

Surely, Apple didn't intend the bad copycat similarity between Leopard and Vista. The unfinished feel (or so I say) and the number of user complaints remind me of the response to Vista earlier this year.

The way I see it: Leopard leaped before its time. Apple should have spent more time on usability and compatibility testing—and worked out more kinks. In the past, I've suggested that large software developers should treat release dates like movie premieres. There is a fixed date, and the software must ship ready or not. I say ready or not, because the software can always be made better. The developer just chooses a date by which the software must be good enough to ship.

But the emphasis should be "good enough," and that's particularly true of an operating system that will be installed as an upgrade. My casual review of Apple and other Mac support forums suggests that a good many of the Leopard users with problems chose the upgrade, rather than clean install, option.

Economics favor a ship-now-and-fix-later approach, because of the huge sales potential leading into the holidays. Apple chose to release its product when Microsoft wouldn't—and Microsoft's choice hurt its partners during holiday 2006. In retrospect, Microsoft should have shipped Vista anyway. Given the number of complaints and compatibility problems, Microsoft and Vista probably would have been no worse off in November and December 2006 than February and March 2007. The Vista ecosystem was no more ready in early 2007 than it was in late 2006, and Microsoft and its partners could have tapped into the lucrative holiday sales period.

Still, if Vista could wait, so could have Leopard. That Leopard leaped last week is potentially good news for Microsoft, as Vista begins to pick up holiday tailwind. Apple's brand sizzles right now, and Mac market share is noticeably increasing. There is a standoff coming between Macs and Vista PCs during holiday 2007. Apple's brand resurgence, while good, brings more scrutiny and less patience from some users, although I contend there remains a big double standard. Microsoft gets more dings than Apple for similar problems.

In marketing, perception is everything. Vista's shakedown is over, while Leopard's is just beginning. Microsoft and its partners should turn Vista's readiness and Leopard's seeming incompleteness to competitive advantage.

Related Posts:

• Security: What Microsoft Can Teach Apple, Microsoft Watch, Oct. 30, 2007
• Leopard Isn't Better than Vista, Microsoft Watch, Oct. 29, 2007
• Why Leopard Is Better than Vista, Microsoft Watch, Oct. 29, 2007
• The Great Double Standard, Microsoft Watch, Oct. 26, 2007
• Apple Is No. 3.; So What?, Microsoft Watch, Oct. 22, 2007
• Vista: Cat-Scratch Fever, Microsoft Watch, Oct. 19, 2007
• Cupertino, Start Your Copiers!, Microsoft Watch, June 12, 2007