We’ve already had discussions about Apple’s policy of “perpetual beta” in connection with software: they will issue an item of software, such as an OS, before it is 100% perfect. The downside of this policy is that puts nearly every individual Mac user in the position of being an involuntary beta tester, and bad things do happen. The upside is a.) fixes come out frequently and rapidly, b.) this way the users’ opinions can be taken into account (look at what happened to the translucent menu bar and Stacks). Anyway, this is i. m. h. o. far superior to the MS strategy of getting it all perfected before putting it out the door, both because things go much slower in the MS world and because in this vale of tears perfection is impossible anyway, so MS screws up too and takes a lot longer to clean up its messes. Well, okay. The question is whether you can say that Apple follows a similar “perpetual beta” policy in the manufacturer of its hardware. Certainly it does in one way — it will put out models of computers where not all features are fully functional with the OS currently available at the time of their release, and that only become such when the next OS is released. But is it true in other ways as well? Some of Gene’s observations make me wonder.

Apple’s successes generate user demand for performance and stability. Far more often than not, Apple engineering and software quickly evolve and improve within the existing lifetime of the product. That’s notable to say as compared to its competitors, who usually sell a box, support what’s inside it hardware-wise, but don’t evolve it further, leaving the computer to obsolesce faster than it should. Microsoft adds the double-whammy with even slower OS innovation, confusing changing interface and security updates with ways to simplify the operating system and make it not only usable, but functionally enjoyable.

In short, Apple’s “whole widget” philosophy is a winner to everyone.

Actually, it’s kind of nice the way Apple is always tinkering. They sometimes come a cropper, but too many computer companies are only concerned about what’s inside the box, not how you use it. Maybe Apple hasn’t gotten it right, to which I will add, yet.

Sometimes the problem is performance. Front Row was awful. It took forever to make up the previews. Now, it is almost snappy. Spotlight was wretched. It was often quicker to use grep. Now, Spotlight is quicker, so I use it all the time, and I like the Applications, Calculator and Dictionary features. I can imagine all sorts of plugins to enhance this, for example, calendar and stock table lookup. (Now, if they could synchronize the Dictionary and the spell checker it would be great).

I find the whole Stacks thing worthless, but it has the germ of a good idea. I can’t use this for my Applications folder because the folder is too big, and too many applications are in subdirectories. Maybe stacks should be smart folders instead, more like playlists, so I can have my 32 most recently launched applications or the like.

Smart Folders also need work. Why can’t I create a smart folder by selecting a set of dates or months from iCal? And, speaking of iCal, it is now much harder to use for a journal now that one has to double click for a pop up, rather than just stepping through dates with a side panel inspector.

It gets awkward at times, and sometimes things seem to move backwards, but at least Apple is moving.