When and Why Should You Update Application Software?

The main problem at most times is the architecture. e.g the newer mac powerpc's(ppc's) compared to their previous architecture,etc. Microsoft has even done a better job at being consistent with their architecture, although, better things could be achieved from moving to a new architecture. Most software companies like to keep up to date with their softwares and also their compatibility with the OS it works with. However, some find it so hard to change because at times, it might mean recoding the whole thing. For example, when the windows vista came out...it was hideous looking for compatible software. it was terrible at first, but software companies stepped up. The issue of updating software and OS will never cease as the present day is producing lots of new stuff, which the previous generation was not used to. We just have to try and adapt with the changes. Making sure we always check our softwares for compatiblity and trying to download the right one. In a way, it makes us smarter, but I understand your point of how annoying it can be, but it is the way it is....

The one question I always ask is What does the new software or OS offer that I would use that I do not have at the present and need? If the answer is nothing, then I do not obtain it.

There appears to be a culture of 'if its new it must be better and I must show that I have the latest' whether it actually offers an improvement. The answer may be it improves productivity; forgetting the new learning curve.

I am a domestic user rather than a business user so that means I have to be careful of my expenditure. Perhaps companies should consider their expenditure along the lines of 'if I was buying thids for home, could I really justify it?'

There is no need to upgrade anything, if what you have is meeting your needs. The only reason for upgrading is to improve capabilities- new features that increase productivity, improved productivity, etc. Fancy eye candy is not an improvement to productivity. All too often, the cycle of software upgrades results in lesser productivity due to bloating with unnecessary features. How long does it take you to turn on your computer and write a letter? If you upgrade, how long will it take you from turning on your computer and writing the same letter? I still use my old Windows 98 machine, because it is faster, although my newer XP machine has a higher clock rate. Using Vista on other machines has led me to the conclusion that it is even slower than XP, when measured from turn on to finished product. This is progress?

Windows 3.11 for Workgroups had all the functionality I needed then (and now, if it were supported). A modern version, which had only the same features but with bugs removed over time (rather than useless features and numerous bugs added over time) would be many times faster than Vista (which I refuse to buy) or 2000, which I use on this machine. Even on a machine fifteen years old (and about 100 times "slower" than this one) I could get that letter out faster than on this one. (And this one, on Vista, would be completely unusable.)

Using Vista is like jumping in a 6000 lb SUV to go to the corner store for a gallon of milk. The companies which create bloated cars with planned obsolescenece and bloated software with planned obsolescence seem quite similar. (Although at least with a current SUV you don't need to stop in the middle of a trip and restart to keep the vehicle from turning to the right when you turn the steering wheel to the right, or to cure some other inexplicable malfunction.)

IMO, there are only two valid reasons for upgrading an OS;

1) moving from 32 bit to 64 bit, 64 bit to whatever, etc, etc, to take advantage of new processor power

2)In the case of Windoze or Mac, to take advantage of new graphics capabilities (this is still pretty independent in the linux/unix world, kinda like applications). I like online gaming and am forced to move along with the graphics upgrades.

Anything else added to an OS, again IMO, is purely unwanted fluff.

As far as upgrading applications; I upgrade when I need to. If I sometimes skip one or two, I'm more than willing to pay the piper when I need to. Sometimes I'll drop an overbloated app when the upgrades no longer serve my purposes. Macromedia Dreamweaver is a good example. It went from a screaming production system to clunky bloatware. Then Adobe bought it. <shudder>

Hooker