Hi.

I also miss Snow Leopard, although for a couple of reasons only.
Firstly, is Alex.
Apple has done a fine job of ruining possibly the greatest text to speechvoice ever made in Lion and beyond.
I did try copying the Snow Leopard Alex to Mavericks, but it didn't completely bring the old Alex back.
It sounded better but still crackled.
The second reason is that stupid gate keeper crap.
I've turned it off, but honestly I think it's a stupid idea and another attempt by Apple to restrict macs like iOS.
Other than that, I don't mind Mavericks since it has some cool VOiceOver features and the interface seems exactly like Snow Leopard.
So, what else does Snow Leopard have that Mavericks broke?
Also, will they ever restore the great lord Alex to his glorious Snow Leopard state?
I heard he would sound better in Yosemite, but I don't know.
Trust me, if I could have the true Snow Leopard Alex in Mavericks, I would ditch all the Nuance voices.

Hi.
It might just be me who quickly gets used to things, but the only thing I miss from Snow leopard is Alex.
Safari though, worked much better in Snow leopard, or was it Leopard? I don't know. I quite often see Safari acting weird, crashes and Voiceover goes busy, busy, busy! The item chooser was broke, so I started to use the rotor instead, so I'm not sure on if the item chooser has been fixed or not.
Oh, the only thing I've noticed they really have messed up is network drives and the access to other computers on the same network. So many people, me included, are often having trouble on accessing network drives from the network section in Finder. The work around is to access the drives by pressing command k, and connect from this window. There might be other alternatives, but it's damn annoying how much they have messed this up for such long time. I think they already messed that up in Lion.
Otherwise, I think Mavericks works quite stable.

What iOS gimmickery is this? You can ignore all of it, it doesn't have any impact on the existing user interfaces. Compare and contrast the difference between Windows 7 and 8, now who's getting gimmickery?

I'm also not sure which version included the voice over drag and drop function, whenever it was it's great for rearranging the dock. The thing I utterly love is I've gained access to iMessage, facebook notifications, calendar syncing and so on without having to change how I use the system. The controls I use to access the computer haven't changed at all, the dock and menubar still work exactly the same, system preferences still works exactly the same, Safari still works exactly the same. I've grown to like the Windows 7 start menu but any OS upgrade I should choose to make with my desktop will remove this, there's just no practical reason to keep redesigning an interface over and over like that.

I also never, ever use Launchpad or mission control. I'm no worse off for it.

I think MS has the business model of trying to differentiate each version of Windows from the previous one as much as possible. When people ask the inevitable question why should I upgrade? MS say look we've built this great new interface, it does this and this and this. Of course Apple are less dependant on software sales than MS so Apple are more able to afford to have large portions of their user base still on older versions of Mac OS, to MS each computer still running Win 7 is one less sale of Win 8.

In fact Mavericks was free which shows Apple just don't care about operating system sales, they care about hardware sales. At the prices they charge for the hardware that's a good thing of course, but MS don't make computers period. I guess the old method of having software and hardware sold by different companies isn't really working any more in the current environment, the big trouble if MS go down too far is fragmentation in the market. The ubiquity of Windows at least gave people the confidence to buy a computer and know they'll be able to get the appropriate software for it, things could get considerably messier if more platforms start barging their way in.

Small point, MS don't see their OS as a long term investment they see them as products with a limited shelf life. Apple use the OS to sell the hardware and frankly I doubt they really care if individual users stick with an older version, it doesn't cost them anything. I have serious reservations about business practices on both sides but that seems a given at this level of corporate tactics, the fact is that that Apple provide Mac OS as a form of support for their hardware so they're freed from a fair chunk of the usual marketing crap.

Perhaps but note the prices they charged for Lion and Mountain Lion, they obviously weren't concerned overly much about profits from the OS. I think it was mostly a transition from having to provide upgrade media to being able to offer it by download, something which readily available broadband connections made possible. Of course like you said they really need to given the prices of their hardware.