I don't disagree with most of what you said... but I would place a few of the priorities in a slightly different order.
For example, while operating systems do occasionally need to be updated, the magnitude of the updates needn't be so extreme.
Security updates for Windows 7 were offered for many years after the product was officially "obsolete" - and almost all software designed for it continued to run on it.
Microsoft also warned users that "there were security benefits to upgrading" and did their best to "push" the upgrade.
However, I know many people who avoided the upgrade for many years, either because they simply saw no compelling reason to upgrade, or because software they used wouldn't work on Windows 10.
(I would go as far as to say that MOST Windows users don't upgrade until they buy a new computer - which always come with the current version on them.)
There is also a rather large discontinuity there in terms of how the operating system is viewed.
The purpose of an operating system is to allow the user to run software.
To "hardcore computer users", the best user interface would be for the operating system to be totally invisible, and simply do its job of running the software.
The ideal Roon computer would boot directly into Roon....and the end user would never know if what was underneath was Apple O/S, Windows, Linux, or something else entirely.
All of the cute icons, and extra "apps" and such, are simply intrusions of the operating system into the business of software.
(I'll bet you don't know what the last ATM machine you used was running on
.)
As for the whole idea of security...
The VAST majority of security issues arise from using a computer for multiple purposes.
Most malware enters a computer via e-mail, Web browsing, or program updates...
There are a few exceptions, but very few, and most of them are only a threat to corporate users...
It would be relatively simple to make a computer very secure if it ONLY had to run Roon....
(I would assume that a Roon ROCK is quite secure and requires very few updates.)
I DO however agree that Roon should have notified their users NOT to update to Catalina...
They should have specifically issued a warning that Catalina was NOT yet an approved operating system on which to run Roon.
(I would assume that either they hadn't been paying attention; or that it did work on the pre-release versions they'd tried it with.)
The responsibility and liability associated with software is always a bit of a vague issue....
However, in this case, it is pretty clear that Roon stopped working because of something that Apple changed (with your permission).
Roon gave you a free trial, you tried it, it worked fine, and you bought it...
(I assume it would still work fine on the exact same computer you had when you bought it.)
They did list "OSX 10.8+" as a requirement, and recommended Mojave, but they do NOT recommend Catalina...
It would be difficult to legally stretch that to say that they claimed their product would work unilaterally on all future OSX versions.
As I said before....
I don't specifically blame Apple because Microsoft is just as bad....
Both Apple and Microsoft update their operating systems for two reasons:
1) To make changes that they see or claim to see as improvements - in an attempt to make their products more competitive.
2) To fix security issues and other problems that they have discovered.
Note that, in most cases, they are NOT "making better security to protect against better attacks" ; they are simply "patching flaws that they have discovered by hackers".
(If there were no flaws in Windows 10 or OSX then there would be no need to ever update either.)
Imagine if the folks who built your home showed up one day, with a construction crew and a demolition crew, knocked out the wall, and moved your kitchen door six feet to the left.
When you complained they informed you that: "It's an update to fix a safety defect we've found in the original structure when we reviewed the blueprints".
And, when you complained, they said: "We hope all of your appliances still fit but it's really their manufacturer's responsibility to make sure they work after we update the place."
(I suspect you wouldn't be at all pleased.)
So, yes, I think Roon should have informed THEIR customers that: "We cannot confirm that Roon works with Apple OSX Catalina so we don't suggest you update your computer yet."
But I also think that Apple should have published a list of: "Programs we know work with Catalina, programs that we know don't work, and software companies who have promised to update their products to work with Catalina."
They could also provide some detailed information about the benefits of the update beyond: "Trust us; it's better."
You would then have the complete information you need in order to make an informed decision about whether to accept the update.
(And, yes, I think that Microsoft should do the exact same thing.)
Incidentally... here is just such a list...
(note that many of these are older versions of the programs mentioned - so updates are available - but probably not free)
However, to be honest, it's not a matter of responsibility, but of cost... by which I mean the cost in terms of customer satisfaction...
- How many customers will Roon lose because Roon stopped working when they updated their Apple computer?
(Some people will drop Roon, and go back to jRiver, or something else.)
- How many customers will APPLE lose if Roon, and some unknown list of other programs, stopped working after they issued the Catalina update?
(Some people will ditch their Mac Mini and buy a ROCK, or tell their friends they're better off buying a ROCK, or a Windows computer.)
(And, yes, some people will see this as proof that "Apple computers really aren't entirely trouble free after all". [Windows users already
KNOW that Windows is often a pain.])
The real answer there will depend on how attached how many people are to Roon... and all the cool features it adds.
(Recall that I have no personal opinion there either way since I am not especially interested in those features.)
Also, in case anybody is curious, while I have several test machines running Windows 10, my personal office computer still runs Windows 7.
(Because it still runs all of our office software, including Microsoft Office, the Adobe suite, and our security applications, just fine.)
(We actually have a mix of Windows 7, Windows 10, and Apple computers here at Emotiva... and even one or two Linux boxes.)
Hi
KeithL -
Some good points -
1. This might not be happening IF one used a dedicated machine for Roon. However, even the dedicated machine would need OS updates occasionally. The dedicated machine will NOT be an isolated server. As you add music to the library, the machine will need internet access to get metadata and artwork. So right there, the server has exposure to all the vicissitudes of internet life. The OS updates aren't done for fun. From Apple's perspective, particularly, there is no charge for OS updates, so all their development work is intended to (in priority order):
a) Protect the hardware and software from malware, viri, and hijacking
b) Increase the hardware efficiency through code optimization
c) Provide better user interfaces and greater functionality
So even a dedicated music server machine needs OS updates if it is to be connected to the internet.
2. The "blame Apple" philosophy is not supported by facts. Apple has offered developer kits for their new OSs every single time they've done an update. The kits are available to developers on request. The vast majority of software on my computer was "Catalina-ready" long before the OS was released to the public. Other software developers availed themselves of the opportunity to make their software compatible prior to the OS release. Roon didn't. What makes Roon's failure particularly egregious is:
a) Roon is charging their customers for the use of their services. It isn't like the customers bought the software and now own it themselves. Roon is charging its customers for the amount of TIME that the customer actually uses Roon. But now, the software is broken and unusable. Yet Roon continues to charge as if their software still worked. I call foul!
b) Roon had the opportunity to prevent all this outcry. All they had to do was to notify their Apple customers via an email that Roon was not yet compatible with Catalina, and that if the customer wanted their Roon install to continue working (with outboard drives) then the customer needed to delay installing Catalina until Roon could provide a fix. Roon sent no such notification to their customers. Now customers who had no warning have installed Catalina and their expensive Roon players no longer work. "Reverting" to Mojave after installing Catalina is a full day's work, and even then, there is a high probability of other issues occurring.
c) Before this is over, I'm predicting a class-action suit that may well be the straw that breaks the Roon-camel's back. And Roon got this grief the old fashioned way - they earned it.
So give up on the bigoted "blame Apple" rhetoric. Enough, already (not focused on you, exclusively, Keith). And don't construe what I'm saying as Microsoft bashing, either. I concede that Windows is just as good an operating system as Apple's. Windows has advantages in some areas, Apple in others. Depending on what is important to you, I can see preferring either. But this isn't a Republican / Democrat issue (as some would like it to be) - it's just what company the user happens to be working with.
And I'm also about fed up with attacking the user, as if user ignorance is somehow the root cause of any problem that occurs. The majority of computer users install updates promptly when they are available. In fact, Windows 10 seems to install them whenever Microsoft chooses, not when the user wants to. Yes, this can be overridden, but for the majority of users, they don't change the defaults. There are good reasons to install updates promptly, but there are also potential issues with doing so. Don't try to use this caveat as a loop to go back to blaming Microsoft or Apple either. As I said earlier, prior to updates both companies make information available to developers. If you're selling software for someone else's OS platform, then it's YOUR responsibility, as a software vendor, to make sure your software stays compatible. It isn't the OS vendor's responsibility to make their OS compatible with the thousands of programs that that might be run.
Now you're welcome to disagree with me, but don't shoot the messenger. These are the facts.
Boomzilla