What is Digg?Related by Keyword 
How are these related stories? Tell us!
- snverhallen, on 11/19/2008, -7/+55I'm really glad their focusing on stability this release. I've found that Leopard has been a bit unstable for me lately, so Snow Leopard will be a welcome addition
- FitFinlay, on 11/19/2008, -2/+21Will this boost in stability be worth the $129 price tag? There has to be some new feature implemented in snow leopard to make it worth the price tag. ZFS would be a good start for all of us, not just on the servers.
- timusca, on 11/19/2008, -3/+21Whether it is worth the $129 is up to you... some people might be willing to spend the money to make things more stable, but if you don't want to upgrade, then don't. If you're happy with Leopard the way it is, then either don't upgrade or visit The Pirate Bay.
- dagamer34, on 11/19/2008, -2/+11Exchange support is well worth the $129. You'd know if you had to rely on Entourage to get your school/corporate e-mail.
- yikiad, on 11/19/2008, -4/+10Rumor is that it will be like $60-80.
- Anders, on 11/19/2008, -11/+25At least it isn't a $219 like Vista Ultimate is.
- bbardlbradd, on 11/19/2008, -23/+9Who's paying?
www.thepiratebay.org
It's not like apple uses serials ;) - dreamtiger, on 11/19/2008, -2/+14Agreed, let's hope ZFS makes the cut.
- InfiniteNothing, on 11/19/2008, -4/+4I think the speed improvements are worth the money.
- BossKey, on 11/19/2008, -3/+38@bbardlbradd - that's pathetic. The best way to convince companies to stop copy protection is to not become the example of why they use it; to not insult the very companies that are the least restrictive:
Users: "Stop treating us like criminals with your activation!"
Industry: "If we don't do that, you'll pirate the hell out of it."
Users: "What kind of an attitude is that to assume the worst about your own customers?"
Apple: "It's OK, we trust you. There is no activation for OS X."
bbardlbradd: "Hey everybody, let's pirate OS X!!!"
Industry: "Thank you so very, very much for proving that we were right all along."
Apple: "We trusted you and you made us look like fools." - Dubbsacc, on 11/19/2008, -8/+14@Anders
First of all, you don't really need Ultimate
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windows-vista/com ...
Second, Vista Ultimate is only $169.99 if you aren't a retard and actually know how to use the Internet for finding your products.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8 ...
Lastly, you really only need Home Premium. For some reason it's not on NewEgg, which is strange, but I found it at Fry's, TigerDirect and other online retailers probably have the same pricing of $109.99.
http://shop1.frys.com/product/5119696;jsessionid=f ... - superkendall, on 11/19/2008, -2/+3We do not know the price tag yet, since there are few user facing features it will probably cost much less than traditional OS X updates.
- MtheoryX, on 11/19/2008, -3/+1How about exchange support?
Or the new Podcast Producer upgrades in Server?
Oh, you just browse the web and check email? Nah, nothing of interest for you here so don't upgrade...that is, unless you want everything to be more stable and much faster. - LMN8R, on 11/19/2008, -14/+8Wow, someone actually tried to compare the price of OS X to Vista *Ultimate*?
OS X's features are far, far more comparable to Vista Home Premium, easily found for $100. Ultimate contains Home Premium + Business features: Business features that really no version of OS X actually has. - superkendall, on 11/20/2008, -3/+7Oh really. Why don't you try to explain what features "Ultimate" has OS X does not.
I don't think you really understand what OS X includes at all... - intellimouse, on 11/20/2008, -10/+4@stupidkendoll: Have you ever used Vista? I don't know if you really understand what it includes at all...
Try comparing Windows Media Center to Front Row sometime. You can record TV with NTSC and ATSC tuners or even CableCARD. Not only that, the Front Row's UI is horrible compared to Media Center and Media Center has about 10 gajillion remote controls that work with it.
How about this feature: I can run it on any hardware that I want. Try that with OSuX. - sinembarg0, on 11/21/2008, -0/+1@Dubbsacc
You really have no idea what I need. I want media center functionality for the HDTV tuner in my pc, and I want Remote Desktop server support. That's Vista Ultimate only.
- vawksel, on 11/19/2008, -3/+26Leopard has been perfectly stable for me. I'm not trolling, i'm serious. I run a Mac Pro 8-core system, running Adobe Flex, Photoshop, TextMate, Firefox, VMWare (XP, CentOS and Ubuntu Simultaneously), Netbeans, XCode 3, Rails (mongrel), Safari, Opera, iTunes and at least a half dozen other programs here and there.
All at the same time, running as long as Apple will let me run without rebooting for updates (usually weeks or months).
I never once had the OS itself crash, ever.- bryantee, on 11/19/2008, -2/+5Me neither. Everything seems ship shape for the most part.
- BossKey, on 11/20/2008, -2/+6Same here, I have uptimes as long as I like. However, Snow Leopard is less about stability (it's already there) and more about optimization.
- hanexar, on 11/20/2008, -4/+3Got my first Macbook last month, crashed 4 times already.
Mac isn't what I expected.
EDIT: I'm coming from a linux world, not windows... - centerblack, on 11/20/2008, -0/+2I've had it crash, but it's not usually Mac OS X's fault. Generally it's some fscked up kernel extension (FTDI I'm looking at you).
I have a chip (FT232RL) that lets me do serial communication w/ AVR's over USB... sometimes when I disconnect the thing, the FTDI driver crashes and forces a kernel panic...
Annoying. Good thing I had to save my work before compiling and flashing the AVR... ;) - MrJagil, on 11/20/2008, -0/+2The only thing that crashes for me is Firefox :o
- AndrewWiggin, on 11/19/2008, -3/+14hahaha "their" hahahaha
- ButterLoyalist, on 11/19/2008, -5/+3har har har
- eidolontubes, on 11/20/2008, -4/+3Since I've be using Leopard, I've had to do more hard resets than I've had to in a long time. Specifically, Front Row.
- pr0carbine, on 11/20/2008, -0/+2yeah, I still reset less than in windows though, and its amazing how long i can go without rebooting at all.
- jimi1337, on 11/20/2008, -1/+2Leopard (client) has been nearly as stable as Tiger for me, so I'm not concerned with upgrading my MacBook Pro to Snow Leopard. Leopard Server, on the other hand, has been a nightmare. It finally began to run a little more smoothly around 10.5.3-10.5.4, but before that update I was dealing with constant AFP service crashes and LDAP issues, among other things. We climbed the AppleCare ladder until finally talking to the developers who wrote those services in Leopard, and they couldn't even help us. They suggested installing dev. seed updates to the services, which only made the problem worse. My organization has 3 Xserve's, all of which I plan to get Snow running on ASAP. I doubt I'll run ZFS on them quite yet, though -- might be too soon.
- h4sh1sh, on 11/20/2008, -0/+2My college required me to get a laptop and all the laptops had 10.5. 12 weeks later it is still as fast as it was when I first got it and it has never crashed. Can't say the same for anything else i've used yet. (Working on trying Ubuntu).
- FitFinlay, on 11/19/2008, -2/+21Will this boost in stability be worth the $129 price tag? There has to be some new feature implemented in snow leopard to make it worth the price tag. ZFS would be a good start for all of us, not just on the servers.
- zwei, on 11/19/2008, -4/+80I am so glad they are working on performance/stability this time. They have thrown in enough stuff (spotlight/dashboard/exposé/spaces/time machine) in the last couple years. I am looking forward to a new Cocoa Finder and true Exchange support ...but I'm mostly excited about the new stuff they are doing with GPU acceleration and multi-core awareness.
- luddep, on 11/19/2008, -7/+12You do realize that a Cocoa Finder won't mean any new functionality to you? I don't get why people get so excited about it.
- drlha, on 11/19/2008, -1/+8"No new functionality" might be pushing it, I'm sure there will be changes, but agreed, the change from Carbon to Cocoa in Finder is mainly due to the move to 64 bit.
- superkendall, on 11/19/2008, -1/+10I can't see them re-writing it without at least just improving the features that are there - and very possibly increasing performance for things like WebDAV or AFP. That has me pretty excited.
- InorganicMatter, on 11/19/2008, -3/+6A Cocoa Finder means we are one step closer to the death of Carbon and 32-bit. That day cannot come soon enough.
- designev, on 11/20/2008, -1/+7A lot of people have used the Finder for years and deal with its quirks and annoyances daily.
A rewrite in Cocoa is surely an opportunity to clean it up a little.
I don't need new features, but if the Finder behaves a little nicer and performs a little better, then great! - SadMartigan, on 11/25/2008, -0/+2Because it means that we suppose that it's a good thing they're actually looking at improving the Finder at all, and all the ways that it could be improved.
One of many improvements:
- Maybe they'll finally get around to making it easier to switch between 'sort by date modified' and 'sort alphabetically' in columns view. Maybe they could add it as a single-click toggle-response to the columns-view button on the tool bar? - spectre_25gt, on 11/20/2008, -0/+1New functionality isn't really necessary from my standpoint. If they can fix some of the hangs that shouldn't be occurring I'd be quite pleased.
- darienphoenix, on 11/19/2008, -1/+3It would be nice if they added some of the features from Path Finder.
- Orlandin, on 11/19/2008, -2/+4It might even be able to run a virtual Windows environment faster than ever.
- luddep, on 11/19/2008, -7/+12You do realize that a Cocoa Finder won't mean any new functionality to you? I don't get why people get so excited about it.
- funkrusher, on 11/19/2008, -20/+2They're really going with Snow Leopard? Damn it I had $100 on Ocelot!
- kevin52094, on 11/20/2008, -1/+2Yeah, I don't really understand why they did that. They already have Leopard, why not mix it up. How about Lion or Cougar?
- jeeky, on 11/20/2008, -0/+3Well technically they aren't changing too many physical things about it from Leopard so it's more of an "upgrade"
- kevin52094, on 11/20/2008, -1/+2Yeah, I don't really understand why they did that. They already have Leopard, why not mix it up. How about Lion or Cougar?
- cukkooo, on 11/19/2008, -118/+1
- Rockkybox, on 11/19/2008, -2/+6Can everyone please report this dick
- designev, on 11/20/2008, -8/+1why?
- designev, on 11/20/2008, -0/+2... why?
- Rockkybox, on 11/20/2008, -0/+2Because his comments appear all over the place, and he just copies and pastes from another comment higher up and adds his site to the end
- Rockkybox, on 11/19/2008, -2/+6Can everyone please report this dick
- rainman513, on 11/19/2008, -11/+2Shh shh shh sh... we dont talk about them...
- SFBWork, on 11/19/2008, -2/+6What's with snverhallen and cukkooo having the same exact comments on this?
- insertAliasHere, on 11/19/2008, -1/+16cukkooo is a spam bot that copies one of the comments on the page and adds his site to it. Bury and report.
- calon9, on 11/19/2008, -3/+7One's human and one's a spambot. Guess which is which.
- calon9, on 11/19/2008, -3/+9One's human and one's a spambot. Guess which is which.
- farfromperfectx, on 11/19/2008, -3/+14One's human and one's a spambot. Guess which is which.
http://www.pornspam4u.com/porn.exe- pr0carbine, on 11/20/2008, -0/+2clicked on link after several milliseconds of hesitation..
- pitchblackjava, on 11/19/2008, -5/+12I'll definitely pony up for a more stable system than Leopard.
- bjornski, on 11/19/2008, -15/+7It doesn't "just work"?
- intellimouse, on 11/20/2008, -10/+5You mean, it doesn't "just work"?
- PecanHead, on 11/20/2008, -9/+5Seriously - you're excited to pay for "service pack"?
- chrisbarr, on 11/20/2008, -1/+3Why do people keep making this comparison? just because it's version 10.x doesn't mean it's a "point upgrade", this is a major version release. The upgrade from 10.4 to 10.5 is the equivalent of XP to Vista.
The free upgrades from 10.5.0 to 10.5.1, etc are the equivalents of the services packs in Windows. Big fixes, but nothing huge and drastic, but still a larger fix than a minor security update. - Macintoshreader, on 11/20/2008, -2/+4This is a whole new OS—not the same thing that a service pack offers. Snow Leopard will have a 64-bit kernel, a Cocoa Finder, will support ZFS read/write, will support up to 16TB of RAM and will implement new technologies like OpenCL and Grand Central. Also, it will have Microsoft Exchange support and will also reduce the footprint of OS X by more than 60%.
I'd pay $59 for that, but definitely not $129. - Syphon8, on 11/20/2008, -2/+2No... No the upgrade from 10.4 to 10.5 was not equivalent of XP to Vista.
More realistically, 2000 to XP. (2000 is NT 5.0, XP is 5.1. Vista is 6.0)
- chrisbarr, on 11/20/2008, -1/+3Why do people keep making this comparison? just because it's version 10.x doesn't mean it's a "point upgrade", this is a major version release. The upgrade from 10.4 to 10.5 is the equivalent of XP to Vista.
- jeeky, on 11/20/2008, -3/+2what
- eltardo, on 11/20/2008, -1/+3I've been using Leopard on a Mac Pro 2.8 (8 core) with 10 gigs ram... I have yet to have it crash, hang, be unstable. It's not perfect, don't get me wrong.. I too am looking forward to Snow Leopard, but I'm curious what you're eluding to in saying 'more stable'. How are you crashing Leopard exactly?
- intellimouse, on 11/20/2008, -0/+1You mean, it doesn't "just work"?
(Let's try this one more time.) - Kelmon, on 11/21/2008, -1/+2There is no excuse these days for an OS to be unstable and it comes to something when you are happy to pay for a new version for something that should be fixed for free in your current one. I can quite understand why Apple will likely charge for 10.6 but lock ups and crashes should not be happening in 10.5 and those issues must be addressed.
- codyman, on 11/19/2008, -10/+9I really hope my 64bit G5 won't be left out in the cold-snow leopard
- pyrates, on 11/19/2008, -1/+25Sorry, but it will be. Leopard is the last PPC release of OS X.
- MtheoryX, on 11/19/2008, -1/+5I've heard (from *very* reliable sources) no PPC support, period.
- colincornaby, on 11/19/2008, -2/+4It will.
Leopard will continue working, but the PowerPC is pretty much dead in the water. The highest of the high end G5's only had quad core, so I don't think Snow Leopard would be very useful to you anyway.- btornado, on 11/20/2008, -1/+3If, in the near future, you have any quad core G5s that aren't of any use to you, feel free to send them my way. I'm sure I'll make better use out of them.
- colincornaby, on 11/20/2008, -0/+1Why? The iMacs coming in January are going to be quad core, and faster than the G5. For your average user, the G5 makes a decent machine, but the average user doesn't really need 10.6. Pro users, who are actually going to be using OpenCL and the multicore enhancements really need to be on Intel.
Multicore enhancements really aren't going to be much good on a dual G5 anyway, because developers figured out how to run code well on two cores long ago without Snow Leopard. A minority of G5's are dual core, and an even smaller minority are quad core. It's simply not worth the time for Apple to do PowerPC.
If you have a Power Mac G5, use it for another year or two with 10.5, and then move on.
- AndrewWiggin, on 11/19/2008, -1/+3Sorry, but I hope it will be so my install isn't huge and so that they can focus on building better products instead of supporting legacy products. Also, it will force developers to focus much less on building programs that work in both environments. Like I said, no offence, but I hope it isn't supported.
- marcushe, on 11/19/2008, -2/+3I hope they are supported. Some G5 machines are still under AppleCare for christ' sake. You guys are acting like they are so legacy - but it's because most of you are Mac newcomers who have only ever used Intel - so you don't understand the situation like a G5 owner would.
Apple did acquire PA Semiconductor, a PPC-based chip company. Although, I still wouldn't be surprised to see PPC dropped, signaled by the now earlier release date, and the recession. - colincornaby, on 11/20/2008, -0/+3I started on Macs long ago with 68k, and while I understand that the late model G5's will be under AppleCare, G5 owners need to understand something:
10.6 would likely not bring you any new features if you are PowerPC. This debate about 10.6 running on PowerPC is useless because 10.6 adds nothing for PowerPC users. 10.6's multicore support is really only useful on 4 cores or higher. Not many quad core G5's were sold. Not many G5's have advanced enough CPU's to run OpenCL. What exactly is 10.6 going to bring you as a PowerPC user?
10.5 is going to keep working just fine with you. To G5 users, 10.6 would be nothing more than a higher number. It adds almost nothing that would actually be useful on a PowerPC machine.
- marcushe, on 11/19/2008, -2/+3I hope they are supported. Some G5 machines are still under AppleCare for christ' sake. You guys are acting like they are so legacy - but it's because most of you are Mac newcomers who have only ever used Intel - so you don't understand the situation like a G5 owner would.
- reformation, on 11/20/2008, -0/+3It will be - its no secret - Snow Leopard will NOT be PPC compatible.
- CIAVT, on 11/19/2008, -0/+33A: Don't be surprised if PPC support isn't in Snow Leopard.
B: I'd rather have this update percolate longer in the labs and finally be released "when it's ready" then have it ship early and buggy. I can wait till next summer/early fall for a stable system.- thekms, on 11/19/2008, -3/+5Agreed, but then again I'm buying my mac over the summer so I might be biased.
- MtheoryX, on 11/19/2008, -2/+3Some people in enterprise development can't simply "wait" for OS X 10.6 Server.
If you feel the initial release will be too buggy...then just wait. I say release early, release often.- CIAVT, on 11/20/2008, -0/+2Because that worked so well for Vista.
- MtheoryX, on 11/20/2008, -1/+1@CIAVT:
You're saying that Vista was released quickly?
I'd say the spread between XP and Vista is the definitive opposite of quick. - JoeOReilly, on 11/22/2008, -0/+1@MtheoryX
No, I think he meant Vista was released early. Duh.
- designev, on 11/19/2008, -2/+2Agreed as well.
If they've completely rewritten the Finder as I think some sites have claimed, then I wouldn't expect to see PPC code in there. - th3wiz4rd, on 11/20/2008, -0/+1A. They've basically already said that PPC won't be supported in 10.6.
B. From an active directory/enterprise standpoint, I'm not going to be expecting much (I'll believe it when I see it). Looking back, 10.4 and 10.5 (although 10.5 IS much more stable) releases have made extraordinary AD compatibility claims, but have been very disappointing overall. If you don't believe me, just as an example try using 10.5 Server's Podcast Producer with AD integration.- MtheoryX, on 11/20/2008, -0/+1Podcast Producer does integrate with AD.
If you're having difficulty with it, you can contact the podcast producer mailing list; several people have successfully integrated with AD already.
- MtheoryX, on 11/20/2008, -0/+1Podcast Producer does integrate with AD.
- downsetdana, on 11/20/2008, -2/+0we got captain negative over here..
- peestandingup, on 11/19/2008, -4/+37"Mac OS X Snow Leopard (10.6) Due in Q1 2009???"
There, I fixed it for you. - Frozo, on 11/19/2008, -6/+1bbard, thanks to people like you, they probably WILL.
- chrisbarr, on 11/20/2008, -0/+1the reply buttons works like this.
- Frozo, on 11/20/2008, -2/+1Yeah, there are also things called mistakes, wise ass.
- chrisbarr, on 11/20/2008, -0/+1the reply buttons works like this.
- smoger, on 11/19/2008, -17/+8just to keep a running tab, the cost of Apple's latest OS is now $260 in the time that Vista has been out. It wouldn't surprise me if they sneak 10.7 in there before the next windows as well, which would bump it to $390(assuming $130 each time), so let's remember this when the rotten Apple crew starts comparing OS prices again in the future.
commence burial.
/written on a Macbook
//that STILL can't reliably connect to a non-Apple wireless router while unplugged- Jambi, on 11/19/2008, -3/+4I'd say if it doesn't offer any worthwhile features, why upgrade? If it does, decide how much your money's worth. It's the same for any OS, really.
- superkendall, on 11/19/2008, -5/+5That's only if you updated each time.
And what is the value of a working OS anyway... priceless. - deadbaby, on 11/19/2008, -5/+8You don't have to buy every release. 10.4 is still equal to, or ahead, of Vista in terms of functionality.
- intellimouse, on 11/20/2008, -3/+4You think so? Have you ever actually used Vista? I use it everyday in my living room. Have you ever compared FrontRow to Windows Media Center? Worlds apart. Have you ever compared Finder to Explorer? A lot of people don't like Finder. So I'm wondering what "functionality" you think OS X has that Windows Vista doesn't.
The other nice thing about Vista is that I don't have to install things like "Quicksilver" in order to have basic functionality that should be included in the OS. Are you going to look it up right now or do you have actual experience that tells you this? - dandonia, on 11/20/2008, -4/+2I can't believe you are complaining about Quicksilver compared with installing an antivirus program that eats resources all the time.Vista is not a improvement on XP, it is a resource hog that lowers performce when compared on the same hardware with XP. And for what improvement? The search function in the Start Menu? A nicer looking interface (though more complecated in areas like networking)? Vista even slowed down copy and paste. I reverted back to XP before SP1 of Vista so it might be better now but don't complain about quicksilver when vista needs a full blown anti-virus/spyware installed.
Bring on Windows 7 and Surfaces. XP is still the most all round operating system compatible with pretty much all hardware and the largest software library but a combo of OSX and XP using either a virtual machine or Boot Camp is something I am eager to try.
Now if only they would increase the processing power of the 17" MacBook Pro. I can't go back to a 15" screen but I can't justify spending £2k+ on a machine where the 15" model has better specs. - intellimouse, on 11/20/2008, -1/+1I don't install anti-virus programs because only idiots get viruses. You talk about it like it's a necessity, so maybe you fit in that category and you're probably better off using a Mac.
- dandonia, on 11/24/2008, -0/+1From your statement I would say you are an idiot or someone who isn't telling the truth.
- intellimouse, on 11/20/2008, -3/+4You think so? Have you ever actually used Vista? I use it everyday in my living room. Have you ever compared FrontRow to Windows Media Center? Worlds apart. Have you ever compared Finder to Explorer? A lot of people don't like Finder. So I'm wondering what "functionality" you think OS X has that Windows Vista doesn't.
- InfiniteNothing, on 11/19/2008, -2/+2Why do you assume that someone would upgrade every time a new version is available? I completely skipped 10.4, for example
- dandonia, on 11/20/2008, -2/+2I know I would. I upgraded to Vista on day release, when I get my mac, I will constantly upgrade my OSX but if this is just a stability thing - couldn't it have been a service pack or something?
- smoger, on 11/20/2008, -1/+1because LOTS of Mac developers have a habit of dropping support for "old" versions of OSX the day that a new version is released. if you use a decent array of software you're guaranteed to run into that problem.
Apple themselves even does it with their iPods(they usually let you fall back 1 version, to be fair, but no more than that)
- ZeppFreak89, on 11/19/2008, -4/+5YARGH!!!! It's good to be a pirate! Thanks apple for no cd-key or activations on your OS!
- dandonia, on 11/20/2008, -0/+1don't bet on it for future releases.
- tucsonwc, on 11/19/2008, -2/+3Which router model? I connect to our corporate wifi devices just fine.
- smoger, on 11/20/2008, -1/+1any router that doesn't have an apple stamped on it. seriously. been this way since 10.4.7 or so. (now @ 10.5.5)
it connects but constantly drops the connection without warning. i then have to click the wifi icon and click on the network name to get it going again.. and im good for another minute or so.
i don't seem to have a problem when the computer is plugged in, but thats not an ideal situation.
- smoger, on 11/20/2008, -1/+1any router that doesn't have an apple stamped on it. seriously. been this way since 10.4.7 or so. (now @ 10.5.5)
- grungegbunny, on 11/19/2008, -26/+2Does anyone else think that Snow Leopard is too close to Fire Fox?
- FredFredrickson, on 11/19/2008, -3/+17No.
- gotacalc, on 11/20/2008, -1/+1You mean that both are animals with assumed temperatures? It's been that way with all previous versions of OS X...
- thegreatgazoo, on 11/19/2008, -10/+6Meh. I have an iBook G4 that still has Tiger on it. I'm still getting patches for it occasionally, and it does what I need it to do and is stable. I'm guessing that Leopard and Snow Leopard have larger footprints, so the system would run slower.
Why upgrade?- superkendall, on 11/19/2008, -2/+7Leopard is faster (on the same hardware), and many things work better. Update if you can.
- 4NDr01D, on 11/19/2008, -1/+11dont worry snow leopard wont work on PPC chips
- InfiniteNothing, on 11/19/2008, -2/+6I have a 1GHz G4 and Leopard is much much faster. It also has time machine and other cool stuff.
- AngelBunny, on 11/20/2008, -0/+2on PPC 10.4 and 10.5 are slower than 10.3 but on x86-64 it starts with 10.4 and 10.5 is slower than 10.4 but 10.6 takes advantage of the different hardware making it ultimately more productive than 10.4 but, most likely, will have a larger foot print than 10.4.
- nicc, on 11/20/2008, -1/+110.5 is faster on all of my PPC machines that 10.3 and 10.4 were.
- Kelmon, on 11/21/2008, -0/+1That's a fair question and one that is not easy to answer. However, you could say that you only should upgrade if the new version offers you features that you want, or applications that you want to run require it. I certainly won't criticise anyone who doesn't want to upgrade because they are happy with their existing system and don't see the value in the new versions.
- superkendall, on 11/19/2008, -2/+7Leopard is faster (on the same hardware), and many things work better. Update if you can.
- FredFredrickson, on 11/19/2008, -23/+15Oh good, let's all pay another $200 for an OS X service pack.
- superkendall, on 11/19/2008, -8/+22Beats paying Microsoft $169 for a disservice pack.
- deadbaby, on 11/19/2008, -7/+10Yeah it sucks how Apple makes you give them your credit card number and you get automatically charged when new OSX releases come out. Er wait, none of that is true.
- farfegnugen, on 11/19/2008, -6/+6That's the great thing about being a college student. My school's bookstore will sell it for $70. That's how much I got Leopard for.
- InorganicMatter, on 11/19/2008, -7/+5Show me the last Windows service pack that added 64-bit support, a backup suite, multiple virtual desktops, internet parental controls, and a major overhaul of Explorer with loads of little improvement and tweaks.
- dandonia, on 11/20/2008, -0/+1is that coming in snow leopard or was it leopard you are refering too?
- Syphon8, on 11/20/2008, -0/+2Windows NT 5.1 being upgraded to 5.2 (Windows XP Pro 64-bit)
- AndrewWiggin, on 11/19/2008, -3/+4It doesn't just improve stability like is talked about often. It will provide support for developers to make programs that efficiently use multi-core systems that have been mainstream for about 2-3 years.
- designev, on 11/20/2008, -7/+7I just loving paying Microsoft $300 for a POS operating system, then waiting months for them to release patches, service packs, updates, etc..
If Apple wants to charge $150 every year and a half, thats fine by me. Their updates generally come as advertised with all features still intact.- SIRBERUS, on 11/20/2008, -2/+2Not an iphone owner I see.
- WinMacLin, on 11/19/2008, -2/+6I'm really looking forward to this update. I'm happy with Leopards level of features so having them focus on Reliability, Performance and Stability is something that I really like. I'm also very happy with its release schedule. A nice treat for early 2009 :)
- cyclades, on 11/19/2008, -4/+55The irony is, this being my first Mac, Leopard to me is highly stable compared to my old windows days. Yet to older Mac users they all grumbles. So if Snow Leopard impresses them, I can't wait to see what it turns out o be like.
- farfromperfectx, on 11/19/2008, -5/+18The irony is, Snow Leopard is supposed to freeze less than regular Leopard.
- superkendall, on 11/19/2008, -7/+5Put down the "irony" phrase Allanis and back away from the sentence.
- farfromperfectx, on 11/20/2008, -6/+4Put down the undeserved sense of superiority Superkendall.
- intellimouse, on 11/20/2008, -9/+2Put down that put-down and come back with a better come-back farfromperfectx.
- kevin52094, on 11/20/2008, -2/+7intellimouse, why do you keep dissing all the mac users? I use Vista I'm fine with it. They use OSX, they are fine with it. I assume you use Vista and are fine with it. Live and Let Live.
- farfromperfectx, on 11/20/2008, -2/+4Thank you Kevin. By the way I'm pretty sure my definition of irony was fine .
- emt1451, on 11/20/2008, -1/+2I just blocked intellimouse. Easy enough problem to solve.
- intellimouse, on 11/20/2008, -0/+1Could you three cry more please? I can't hear you.
- farfromperfectx, on 11/20/2008, -0/+2lol intellimouse became a fan of me. I feel honored.
- superkendall, on 11/19/2008, -7/+5Put down the "irony" phrase Allanis and back away from the sentence.
- theWaterboy, on 11/19/2008, -2/+1I've had little to no issues with reliability, so I am unsure what the other people are complaining about. Perhaps it's more an issue with the G5, as opposed to Intel?
- Kelmon, on 11/21/2008, -0/+1Speaking personally, my MacBook Pro locked up yesterday afternoon 10-minutes before I was due to start delivering a presentation. It doesn't happen often but Leopard has been the most problematic version of the Mac OS that I have used since 10.2.8 when I switched. Needless to say that I was less than impressed with the lock up and the time required to reboot (it took 2), restart Parallels and Keynote, made me late.
Grrrrr....
- Kelmon, on 11/21/2008, -0/+1Speaking personally, my MacBook Pro locked up yesterday afternoon 10-minutes before I was due to start delivering a presentation. It doesn't happen often but Leopard has been the most problematic version of the Mac OS that I have used since 10.2.8 when I switched. Needless to say that I was less than impressed with the lock up and the time required to reboot (it took 2), restart Parallels and Keynote, made me late.
- bradleyland, on 11/20/2008, -1/+4Anyone grumbling that the the older MacOS was better is just trying to sound OG. I've been using and working on Macs since MacOS 8. That's not a terribly long time, but back then, we still had to do things like manually set the amount of physical memory allocated to a given application. How ridiculous. Also, older versions of MacOS had no protected memory space, so when one app crashed, you could count on performing a system restart, because other apps were soon to follow.
I don't miss the "good ol' days" one bit.- Macskeeball, on 11/20/2008, -0/+2Don't forget extension conflicts.
- Syphon8, on 11/20/2008, -1/+3"but back then, we still had to do things like manually set the amount of physical memory allocated to a given application. How ridiculous. Also, older versions of MacOS had no protected memory space, so when one app crashed, you could count on performing a system restart, because other apps were soon to follow."
I mean, I'm still not a huge fan of the Mac OS, but seriously, why in the ***** did people ever use it before Cheetah? - Kelmon, on 11/21/2008, -0/+1I still have a fondness for 10.3 when compared to later releases. That was stable for me on Day 1 and delivered pretty good performance increases. Since then the releases have been spotty, particularly in their Day 1 release forms that have usually given me a few kernel panics.
- AngelBunny, on 11/20/2008, -0/+1i've wondered that myself. i'm guessing since i don't grumble but my guess is 10.5 has to much overhead. it uses to many cpu cycles and consumes to much memory. its productivity isn't up to the old school mac standard maybe? i started with os 6 and the OS was like 400kB in size and ran everything super quick. loading screens didn't exist back then. so if someone is use to that environment were the whole OS is less than 1MB and today an OS is like 20GB+ for nearly the same features just a nicer look and stability I can understand why there would be grumbles.
- farfromperfectx, on 11/19/2008, -5/+18The irony is, Snow Leopard is supposed to freeze less than regular Leopard.
- digitallysick, on 11/19/2008, -1/+4They will have do to a lot to sell me on it. So far i haven't seen a list of what will be included and how its going to help me, if i upgrade?
- superkendall, on 11/19/2008, -1/+3Faster and more stable. As a user you'll not see many new features, but there will be some new frameworks that make it much easier to write code that takes advantage of all the cores modern computers offer (say, Snow Leopard specific faster filters in Photoshop).
- AngelBunny, on 11/20/2008, -1/+1depends what programs you use. do you use any number crunching programs? like video encoding, image editing, or anything that works your CPU at all? if so then once developers get ahold of 10.6 they can eventually use the CPU to offload work for the CPU. adobe's CS4 is already doing this. here is an example http://www.nvidia.com/object/builtforadobepros.htm ...
if you don't do these types of things and only surf the web and check email and that sort of thing then you will probably not notice much of a difference. - Macskeeball, on 11/20/2008, -0/+1http://www.apple.com/macosx/snowleopard/
- Kelmon, on 11/21/2008, -0/+1Selling Snow Leopard is going to be very difficult relative to past releases. Given the lack of end-user features there isn't a whole lot that they can show in videos or screenshots that we have not already seen. In fact, they are probably going to have to try and sell this one based on benchmarks. That will work for those who need the speed but the casual users may well not bother until they buy a new Mac that comes with 10.6.
- superkendall, on 11/19/2008, -1/+3Faster and more stable. As a user you'll not see many new features, but there will be some new frameworks that make it much easier to write code that takes advantage of all the cores modern computers offer (say, Snow Leopard specific faster filters in Photoshop).
- cadmiumpaint, on 11/19/2008, -6/+3not sure what i'm gonna do here. I really don't like leopard at all...its buggy, doesn't work well with my pro apps and i just don't like some of the new interface features like the stacks and all that junk. Just gives me extra clicks to do the same function. I'm trying it out on my old G4 powerbook and its made the thing incredibly slow.
I'm using 10.4.11 for home and work and i'm not really excited to upgrade to this snow leopard thing until i hear some real feedback that its just as stable and user friendly as what i'm currently using and used to.- AngelBunny, on 11/20/2008, -2/+210.6 is for x86-64 only
- cadmiumpaint, on 11/20/2008, -1/+2yes well i know that. I was just trying out leopard on my old backup powerbook before taking the plunge on my newer machines that i use to make a living with. i don't really like it much.
- cadmiumpaint, on 11/20/2008, -1/+2yes well i know that. I was just trying out leopard on my old backup powerbook before taking the plunge on my newer machines that i use to make a living with. i don't really like it much.
- Kelmon, on 11/21/2008, -0/+1If Snow Leopard is just as user friendly and stable as 10.4.11 then I wouldn't bother upgrading since you already have a good system. What I'm waiting for is confirmation that 10.6 will be much better than what I already have and therefore worth the cost and hassle of upgrading.
I have 10.5 installed on an old PowerBook G4 Ti 1GHz and it seems fine relative to Tiger. Certainly Spotlight searches are much faster than they used to be.
- AngelBunny, on 11/20/2008, -2/+210.6 is for x86-64 only
- sickb13, on 11/19/2008, -14/+5wow I'm so excited...
not- emt1451, on 11/20/2008, -0/+1and we care, why?
- logicalriot, on 11/19/2008, -3/+24they're going to run out of large cats
- designev, on 11/19/2008, -3/+1uh oh
- lowdose, on 11/20/2008, -1/+5House cats?
- DNABeast, on 11/20/2008, -1/+8But who's going to upgrade to 'Tabby'?
- kevin52094, on 11/20/2008, -0/+8Cougar? Lion? Then we can move onto OSXI 11.0 Grizzly 11.1 Polar 11.3 Black
- Syphon8, on 11/20/2008, -0/+2The OS X beta was called Kodiak...
- anaesthetica, on 11/20/2008, -0/+2Apple has registered Cougar and Lynx, so those are possibilities. Lion is still available, although doesn't really sound all that cool. They could try more subspecies names, like Sabertooth, Bengal, etc. They could even do a shout out to Penn State and name one Nittany...
- nshady, on 11/20/2008, -0/+1Personally, I'm hoping for Stephen Jr.
- virtualball, on 11/20/2008, -0/+9Mac OS X 10.7 Calico Kitten
- solsurvivor, on 11/20/2008, -4/+410.8 Wet Pussy
- magicmushroom73, on 11/20/2008, -0/+3OS X 10.8 Gay Panda
- Syphon8, on 11/20/2008, -0/+5They technically only have Cougar, Clouded Leopard, and Bornean Clouded Leopard left.
TERRIBLE names, those last two, although they already used two names that aren't technically big cats... (Panther is from the genus of the roaring cats, and Puma is the genus name of the cougar.)
Extending to other cats they could do Mac OS X Lynx, or Mac OS X Smilodon.
Smilodon would be lulzy. - digitallysick, on 11/20/2008, -0/+510.7 Ocelot !!
- ChromaVita, on 11/20/2008, -0/+3I just want to make it clear that when Apple releases a product that's actually named like this, that you heard it hear first:
"Ocelot of new features"
Everyone will be using it.
- ChromaVita, on 11/20/2008, -0/+3I just want to make it clear that when Apple releases a product that's actually named like this, that you heard it hear first:
- flarn2006, on 11/19/2008, -6/+1Jordan Hubbard? Isn't he a scientologist?
- AndrewWiggin, on 11/19/2008, -2/+3I'm suprised no one's commented on how this is unlikely, despite what this guy suggests. It will probably still come at the WWDC in June. I don't know for sure, but that's my best guess, since this guy who guessed Q1 doesn't work for Apple even.
- superkendall, on 11/20/2008, -1/+2I thought January was Apple's original estimate (it's when I thought it was coming out).
- Kelmon, on 11/21/2008, -0/+1Agreed - Snow Leopard is not ready for release yet. When a fully feature complete beta has been distributed to ADC members and the feedback has been positive, then I'll expect a release. The idea that Apple is about to release this OS in the next month or so is absolutely crazy and without basis in reality.
- ButterLoyalist, on 11/19/2008, -3/+3I'm really glad their focusing on stability this release, lol. I've found that Leopard has been a bit unstable for me lately, so Snow Leopard will be a welcome addition!
- archer75, on 11/20/2008, -1/+2I agree
- AnarchyIsOrder1, on 11/20/2008, -2/+1A "lol" and an exclamation point, and you think that's an original comment?
- jdpiehl, on 11/20/2008, -3/+610 bucks says a new iMac comes out the same time Snow Leopard comes out.
http://guides.macrumors.com/iMac_Buyer's_Guide- DavidTurnbull, on 11/20/2008, -0/+1I hope so. I've been wanting a new iMac, but I don't want to buy one and then have the new ones released.
At least a release in Q1 gives me a time frame. - Kelmon, on 11/21/2008, -0/+1I'll take that bet - it sounds like safe money to me since I'm expecting the iMac to be refreshed in January for MacWorld whereas there is no chance that Snow Leopard will be released then. June 2009 still sounds like a reasonable date to me since they still have a lot more testing that needs to be done.
- DavidTurnbull, on 11/20/2008, -0/+1I hope so. I've been wanting a new iMac, but I don't want to buy one and then have the new ones released.
- altjeringa, on 11/20/2008, -7/+2Still think it should just be called 10.5.1.... cause it's all the stuff they should have put in 10.5 instead of all the pretty and useless crap they did.
- superkendall, on 11/20/2008, -2/+7Actually they put a lot of serious and useful frameworks into 10.5, like CoreData and CoreAnimation. On top of that they also solidified the kernel API to make life easier for device driver writers.
10.5 was far from a useless release, it made more sense from a practical standpoint than Tiger.- Kelmon, on 11/21/2008, -0/+1Core Data was introduced in 10.4 along with Core Video and Core Audio, if I remember correctly, and continued the work started in 10.3 with Cocoa Bindings. Aside from that, I agree with you entirely.
- DrBrianFields, on 11/20/2008, -1/+12uhh, actually they're on 10.5.5, so I don't think 10.5.1 is gonna work.
- ryangall7, on 11/20/2008, -0/+1I like all the "useless" things, their fun. I think that we all should like "useless" things, the world would be a much happier place, albeit less productive, but happier
- superkendall, on 11/20/2008, -2/+7Actually they put a lot of serious and useful frameworks into 10.5, like CoreData and CoreAnimation. On top of that they also solidified the kernel API to make life easier for device driver writers.
- DelMonte, on 11/20/2008, -1/+9I REALLY hope that Snow Leopard will bring back customizable columns for Spotlight results like you had in Tiger. That's the only thing I'm asking for.
- Zebceponaf, on 11/20/2008, -8/+2WILL IT PLAY STARCRAFT? PPPPPPLLLLLLLLLLEEEEEEEAAAAAAAASSSSSSSSSSEEEE!!!!!!!!!!11!!!
- dtham, on 11/20/2008, -0/+1Umm.. the OSX version of Starcraft runs fine. Though I think it's emulated from PPC using (Rosetta?) but if you have an Intel processor it's more than enough to handle Starcraft.
If you're talking about Starcraft 2, Blizzard has been good at releasing along with PC. Legacy Starcraft is unlikely to have new updates.- Syphon8, on 11/20/2008, -0/+1StarCraft's latest patch came out in October, I believe.
They still patch it rather frequently, I believe that's the third patch in 2008.
- Syphon8, on 11/20/2008, -0/+1StarCraft's latest patch came out in October, I believe.
- dtham, on 11/20/2008, -0/+1Umm.. the OSX version of Starcraft runs fine. Though I think it's emulated from PPC using (Rosetta?) but if you have an Intel processor it's more than enough to handle Starcraft.
- evanscott07, on 11/20/2008, -7/+1you cant jsut add 'snow'.. lame
- Syphon8, on 11/20/2008, -1/+3the Snow Leopard is an entirely seperate genus.
- magicmushroom73, on 11/20/2008, -0/+1Yep Snow leopard Steve jobs turtle necks unplugged!
- Syphon8, on 11/20/2008, -1/+3the Snow Leopard is an entirely seperate genus.
- DavidTurnbull, on 11/20/2008, -0/+32Mac OS X Lolcat 10.7
- anaesthetica, on 11/20/2008, -0/+3I heard it's going to be Mac OS X 10.7 Ceiling Cat...
- PhattyPhattMatt, on 11/20/2008, -1/+2doesnt basement cat work with Microsoft?
- anaesthetica, on 11/20/2008, -0/+3I heard it's going to be Mac OS X 10.7 Ceiling Cat...
- AsusMobo, on 11/20/2008, -0/+1I mean what happens when they run out of cats?
- chadseld, on 11/20/2008, -0/+2I think the just did. Snow leopard is a last ditch attempt to avoid using Liger.
- Syphon8, on 11/20/2008, -0/+2They still have two other leopards, and Cougar. And extinct big cats.
- chadseld, on 11/20/2008, -0/+2I think the just did. Snow leopard is a last ditch attempt to avoid using Liger.
- dmcbride6, on 11/20/2008, -0/+1The Exchange support and the speed increase will be enough for me. Apparently, it will be making use the hybrid video card setup which is cool.
I haven't had too many stability issues with Leopard but more stability is always a plus. - petethepanda, on 11/20/2008, -3/+2I love Macs, but this paying for what are essentially service packs thing is *****.
- AppleMacStud, on 11/20/2008, -1/+5LOL. You have absolutely no idea what Snow Leopard really bring to the table. It's faaarrr from a service pack like Windows XP SP3. Research it, Google is your friend.
- reformation, on 11/20/2008, -1/+6Your not.
Since 10.5 came out we have had 5 FREE updates which could be considered Service Packs - that's why we are on 10.5.5.
Tiger even goes all the way to 10.4.11 - its one louder. - petethepanda, on 11/21/2008, -0/+110.4 was the exact same damn thing as 10.3. 10.5, while it had a few noticeable differences, did not really change anything at all for 95% of users. Neither 10.4 nor 10.5 have had any more noticeable difference over 10.3 than the XP service packs had. Every year and a half or two years you spend another $100 in incremental updates with hardly any change to the average user except perhaps a bit more stability... and I've paid $200 over the last few years for that.
Sounds like ***** to me.- Kelmon, on 11/21/2008, -0/+1You must have had a different version of Tiger and Leopard. Both added quite a bit from my perspective as end-user and developer. While I have a fondness for Panther, what did that add that Jaguar didn't such that you'd ignore the features added in the last 2 releases?
I have absolutely no problem with paying for updates to the Mac OS. The updates are cheap, relatively frequent and always add functions/features that I find useful in my day-to-day work.
- Kelmon, on 11/21/2008, -0/+1You must have had a different version of Tiger and Leopard. Both added quite a bit from my perspective as end-user and developer. While I have a fondness for Panther, what did that add that Jaguar didn't such that you'd ignore the features added in the last 2 releases?
- seantubridy, on 11/20/2008, -1/+1I'm waiting for Cougar.
- centerblack, on 11/20/2008, -0/+1You old, she pregnant, can't have a couple of old pregnant bitches running around in the club!
What the ***** is she doing at the club anyway? That's not even good parenting right there! Your old ass should know better than that...
- centerblack, on 11/20/2008, -0/+1You old, she pregnant, can't have a couple of old pregnant bitches running around in the club!
- kkiran, on 11/20/2008, -1/+1I don't think not upgrading is an option ;) We all want to welcome the latest in technology (Digg users atleast!)...
Complaining about price? Enroll in ADC (Student) for $99, get a free Apple T-Shirt, Snow Leopard OS Disk, Hardware Discount....!! - rizzo2008, on 11/20/2008, -1/+2OS 11?
- fastguyrules, on 11/20/2008, -1/+2I hope they revise Frontrow's integration with iTunes and AirPort.
- AppleMacStud, on 11/20/2008, -2/+3Pity, all of the Windows fanboys are getting excited about Vista 2nd edition but Snow Leopard will slaughter it in performance.
- gibsonorbust, on 11/20/2008, -3/+1Your '07 MacBook aint doin' ***** more with Snow Leopard. This is when Apple leverages their new notebooks and Pro machines to expand far beyond the competition. The Mac Pro will soon become the supercomputer it used to be in the PPC days.
- magicmushroom73, on 11/20/2008, -0/+5And I take it your a Mac genius who has tested Snow leopard against Windows 7 then?
- AppleMacStud, on 11/21/2008, -2/+1I agree... and that's why I will soon have my hands on a new aluminum 15" MacBook Pro... Sleep tight and don't let the bed bugs bite. :)
- lolwut9000, on 11/20/2008, -0/+1Dude your name is AppleMacStud, of course we can listen to you for unbiased news and allegations of soon to come operating systems... /s
- gibsonorbust, on 11/20/2008, -3/+1Your '07 MacBook aint doin' ***** more with Snow Leopard. This is when Apple leverages their new notebooks and Pro machines to expand far beyond the competition. The Mac Pro will soon become the supercomputer it used to be in the PPC days.
- PhattyPhattMatt, on 11/20/2008, -0/+2i will believe it when i see it...
- Nimda11, on 11/20/2008, -1/+4Better do all they can because the Windows 7 Launch will be putting Apple on notice.
- Kelmon, on 11/21/2008, -0/+1Windows 7 will have limited impact on Apple and vice verse. The aftermath of each launch, however, might have an impact if, for example, Windows 7 is truly amazing and Snow Leopard is terrible.
- Nimda11, on 11/21/2008, -0/+1I think Windows 7 is when you will see solid and robust integration with all of Microsofts wares, WinMo, Appstore, Zune, all the Live stuff.
It probably wont have a huge impact but I think it'll make Microsoft much more relevant in the consumer space.
I hope it's good, OS X is like dancing with a body cast on, and Ubuntu sucks if you are a windows power user. Right now I am best served by Windows Server 2008. Fast Flexible Stable and did i mention FAST :)
- Nimda11, on 11/21/2008, -0/+1I think Windows 7 is when you will see solid and robust integration with all of Microsofts wares, WinMo, Appstore, Zune, all the Live stuff.
- Kelmon, on 11/21/2008, -0/+1Windows 7 will have limited impact on Apple and vice verse. The aftermath of each launch, however, might have an impact if, for example, Windows 7 is truly amazing and Snow Leopard is terrible.
- digitallysick, on 11/20/2008, -1/+2I want a tabbed finder this time damn it , Steve i hope you are listening to me
- lochness, on 11/20/2008, -0/+5AWESOME !!!
I can't WAIT for the probably "over 300 new features".
148 tweaked fonts
42 altered window layouts..
and about 3-4 things that ARE features that mean something.- CIAVT, on 11/20/2008, -0/+1They have said numerous times this release will be light on enduser "new features". 99% of the improvements are under the hood.
- CIAVT, on 11/20/2008, -0/+1They have said numerous times this release will be light on enduser "new features". 99% of the improvements are under the hood.
- hellomrwu, on 11/20/2008, -0/+6Mac OSX Thunder Cats, hooo!!!
- XionGreen, on 11/20/2008, -1/+0thunder cats are go!
- Flashman, on 11/20/2008, -1/+2Welp, better start saving the $99 or whatever this will cost.
- vanityclaire, on 11/20/2008, -0/+2I have one of those "preview" copies from WWDC that the article mentions.
I can confirm the awesomeness that is Snow Leopard. - Kelmon, on 11/21/2008, -0/+1If there is an early release then I'll eat my hat. There's been no public demonstration of the new OS and, to my knowledge, only 2 betas released since June. This release needs much more testing than earlier releases since it is being sold on stability and performance, and that testing hasn't been done yet. I'm pretty certain that we haven't even seen a feature complete beta yet distributed to ADC members.
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content posted by Digg users is