I'm not happy with Leopard
I've given Leopard a chance, but it's pretty clear, this is not a good operating system release. — I've been out of the Mac loop for most of the last decade, just got back in a bit over 2 years ago. I don't know if early OS releases are generally as crappy as this one …
Context & Ripple Effects
Leopard shipped in late October 2007 to mostly warm reviews — Computerworld's in-depth take had it leaping to new heights, and CNET argued the release would open the Mac OS X floodgates and embarrass Microsoft. Within a week the tone was splitting: Tech.co.uk asked whether Leopard was still in beta, and VoIP Watch found the update broke SIP-based calling.
Scripting News's post matters because it comes from a long-time observer who says he only rejoined the Mac world two years ago — a returning user judging Leopard against no nostalgic loyalty, and concluding this is not a good OS release. That converts scattered compatibility grumbles into a credibility question about the launch itself.
First-order effects
- Early upgraders weighing whether to move from Tiger now have a prominent dissenting voice alongside the launch-week praise, making the upgrade decision harder for the exact audience Apple's October marketing targeted.
- Apple faces a widening gap between its launch narrative and field reports — SIP breakage on VoIP setups and beta-quality complaints give critics concrete defects to cite rather than taste-level objections.
Second-order effects
- The CNET framing of Leopard as a release that would embarrass Microsoft is now vulnerable to reversal: if Vista became shorthand for a troubled OS launch, commentators can apply the same template to Apple, and PC Magazine's comparison space makes that analogy available.
- Developers and peripheral makers whose products broke under Leopard absorb support costs and patch pressure immediately, shifting some launch burden from Apple onto its ecosystem.
Third-order effects
- If the pattern holds — ambitious releases shipped with rough edges, then criticized publicly by influential independent voices — day-one OS upgrades become a risk calculation for users rather than a default, weakening the automatic install base each major release used to bank on.
- Review authority continues migrating from magazine verdicts at launch to blogger follow-ups weeks later, meaning an OS release's reputation is set by a second wave of coverage Apple does not control.
The trend: OS launch reputations are increasingly decided by a delayed wave of independent-blogger scrutiny rather than launch-day reviews, forcing Apple and Microsoft to manage a second, harsher news cycle after every major release.