[chezpaul]

Originally Posted by Stradlater

This thread is redundant because there are already some Tiger-is-hype threads out there. This thread is just going to be a rehash of arguments.

I just did a search on this forum and I can't find a thread post the release date of Tiger talking about how hypped Tiger is. But hey, I don't live here like some...

To me, overall it seems like the normal to high user will feel the same (HYPE) and the expert, programmer user will love Tiger.

But to me it's just 10.3.9 with Dashboard and some crashes.
I did check my RAM with memtest and it's all good, so that's not the reason for my crashes. And this is the first time after an upgrade that I can think of, that I've had this many crashes.

Nobody has said anything about automator.... or the cool things you can do with it.

[TimmyDee51]

Have you done a clean install? I would suspect that as the reason for your crashes and not Tiger. I have a dual 867 MHz G4 (same family as your dual 1 GHz) and haven't had a crash yet.

Also, Tiger is Dashboard and Automator and Spotlight and CoreImage and CoreData and a new kernel and other things. You may not appreciate them yet as many developers have not fully taken advantage of them, but give it time.

[Grrr]

Originally Posted by Stradlater

This thread is redundant because there are already some Tiger-is-hype threads out there. This thread is just going to be a rehash of arguments. Some of them have been dismissed already.

Like this one:

Learn what "bloat" means. Learn just what is new other than those easily-seen new features that you feel are gimmicky.

Thanks for your input. But I dont 'need' to learn anything. I've read all about the 200+ new features, and toyed with a good many of them on both of my macs. And to my mind, a lot of it isn't even new. It's just 'integrated'. You'll be telling me Dashboard is new next.. And a lot of the 'new' features are actually pretty laughable anyway.. Seen the new scalable mouse cursor? Its bloody awful.
And remember, I didn't say it was a bad OS, Its just not a massively improved over 10.3 than Apple wanted us to believe.

[Person Man]

Originally Posted by Grrr

Its just not a massively improved over 10.3 than Apple wanted us to believe.

You mean from an end-user standpoint.

From a developer standpoint it is very much massively improved. It will take a while before applications that really use those improvements will be readily available...

[TheTraveller]

Hmm, I'm inclined to agree that it's over-hyped. It doesn't seem all that much snappier on my PowerBook, and it has crashed/frozen twice in the 6 days or whatever I've been using it. Spotlight is cool, not as fast as I'd been lead to believe. I don't feel ripped off or anything, but it doesn't quite live up to the hype IMO.

[Macpilot]

I must admit that depending on the audience, Tiger is over-hyped.

For the typical customer (not a Developer) walking into the Apple Store, Tiger is basically RSS, Dashboard and Spotlight. Those three features are impressive (to me anyway), but whether they are $129-impressive for a potential upgrade customer is the question. Of course you can get it cheaper, like Amazon for $70. I think for people who are still on Jaguar or even 10.1, it is a must-have upgrade to breath new life in an older G3 Mac, as long as those folks put more RAM in those machines.

I am sure that all the under-the-hood improvements will yield some great stuff, but I don't have enough technical understanding to fully grasp what that may be.

I don't really see any speed increases on anything but start-up, which does not happen frequently enough to matter. I feel Panther was very stable and very fast. But then I am running 2 Gigs RAM and I am comparing Tiger to Panther on the same CPU.

I always accurately named and organized my files in the proper folders, so Spotlight is nice but not super-amazing.

So far, some Dashboard widgets are flaky at best, but I am patient for an update that will address these bugs. Just waiting for a Movie widget and Sherlock will be almost useless.

The RSS built into Safari is really slick IMO.

Some things I have not seen any improvement in are the UI inconsistencies and Finder response. iDisk behavior is still wierd.

[chezpaul]

I just read this on Macfixit...:

"Widget memory usage Widgets, though generally limited in functionality and presented as periphery applications, can use surprisingly high amounts of RAM.

For instance, a recent check of Activity Monitor on an in-house test Mac OS X 10.4 system with 640 MB of RAM installed revealed the following real memory usage for some of Apple's default Widgets:

Stocks DashboardClient: 19.23 MB
Weather DashboardClient: 18.55 MB
Calendar DashboardClient: 13.11 MB
These figures do not change significantly when the Widgets are in active use (fluctuating by 2-3 MB), indicating that the drain on system resources takes place consistently, as long as Dashboard is an active item in the Dock.

At least initially, this should not be a cause for major concern. Mac OS X has advanced methods of dealing with memory usage from such applications, and the figure reported by Activity Monitor merely represents the requested memory for a specific process, which can be lessened when other process request memory.

If, however, you are experiencing significant system slow-down that can be realistically attributed to Widgets, you can end all Widget processes by temporarily killing the Dock. This can be accomplished by opening Activity Monitor (located in Applications/Utilities) and looking for the "Dock" process, then clicking the "Quit Process" button.

This will end all currently running Widget processes, which will not be re-activated until you again click the Dashboard icon and re-display active Widgets."



Now I wonder if Apple thought: "Mmmm, maybe we shouldn't give them the option to quit Dashboard, lets not let them realize they don't really need it."


I'm sorry but I just bought another new mac, a mini this time. It comes with 256 RAM and Tiger, well let me tell you, that's a joke. You can't do anything with it. I get the turning beach ball constantely. Just opening windows does it. Reading that article, I think I know why... (I had opened a bunch of widgets). And yes, of course I'll be adding RAM but if this is THE Mac that the PC world will be buying...

[analogika]

Originally Posted by Grrr

Seen the new scalable mouse cursor? Its bloody awful.

What?

Why?

And to whom?

[memory-minus]

Originally Posted by analogika

What?

Why?

And to whom?

System Prefs > Universal Access > Mouse > Cursor Size

[malvolio]

Originally Posted by analogika

What?

Why?

And to whom?

As soon as you increase the cursor's size to any significant degree, it looks all jagged on the edges.
Luckily, I don't need a cursorzilla.

[off/lang]

Originally Posted by osxisfun

I like cheese.

Yeah, cheese is okay, I guess.

[hldan]

Some people here are saying that they don't see the speed increase in Tiger? It's because they are looking for the typical things like the finder zooming open or apps opening faster. This can only happen with a faster processor.
What's been overlooked or just not noticed is the dot Mac speed increase which is incredibly faster. On both my 800Mhz iMac G4 and my 17" 1.33Ghz Powerbook it always took more than 3 hours to mount a local copy of my iDisk to my desktop in Jaguar and Panther.
In Tiger it took an unbelievable 3 minutes on each machine.

Permission repair is much faster now. It used to take just under 10 minutes until I yawned myself to sleep, now it takes just less than a minute.

The Cron scrips in cocktail are quick for system maintainance now and when installing new apps the "optimization" (pre-binding) that Apple does zips right through without taking a freaking lunch break like before.

These are the underpinnings that increased the speed of Tiger that requires no processor speed increase. There's much more under the hood but it's only been a week, I'm sure they will be found.

[Weyland-Yutani]

I'm not sure I agree with the original poster.. because I don't feel Tiger was hyped all that much. Compared to Panther anyway. Apple talked about Tiger as the last major release for a long time, that it would incorporate some neat search features and advanced graphics. Lots of under the hood improvements. Apple delivered and well. Steve Jobs talked about Safari RSS and Dashboard, but even on stage he failed to excite or impress. It was.. almost boring watching him then.

Tiger delivers the most complete version of Mac OS X yet - asides from the same crappy old Finder and Dock - it is a damn fine work of software engineering. IMO it isn't over-hyped because it wasn't really hyped. "Expectations were slightly raised but not a lot."

There are always those who feel they have to defend every single move Apple makes and every decision Apple makes is flawless.. I'm not one of them, but I recognize that with Tiger Apple delivered what they promised without much hype at all. 10.4 is a damn fine OS.

Still, it can become so much better.

[TopQuark]

Come on people. Dashboard, Spotlight, and Automator aren't what anyone could call *essential* technologies, and don't offer anything that's not already available anyway. Tiger also seems to have broken more apps than either Jaguar or Panther, and any speed gains in the UI (Getting back to the responsiveness of OS9 is what we're really all interested in, right? ) seem miniscule at best. I really don't see any reason for anyone to buy this upgrade, especially if they're using a machine that isn't Core Image compatible.

If you ask me, Tiger is nothing more than the breakaway point for 32-bit Macs, just as OSX was the breakaway point for 601/604-based Macs. Yes, a G4 or G3 can boot into Tiger and may run nearly as well as it did under Panther, but it can't really take advantage of the technologies that separate Tiger from Panther. I just don't see the point of buying it for a G4 or G3, not unless you want to shell out big bucks for a Radeon 9800.

[hldan]

Originally Posted by TopQuark

Come on people. Dashboard, Spotlight, and Automator aren't what anyone could call *essential* technologies, and don't offer anything that's not already available anyway. Tiger also seems to have broken more apps than either Jaguar or Panther, and any speed gains in the UI (Getting back to the responsiveness of OS9 is what we're really all interested in, right? ) seem miniscule at best. I really don't see any reason for anyone to buy this upgrade, especially if they're using a machine that isn't Core Image compatible.

If you ask me, Tiger is nothing more than the breakaway point for 32-bit Macs, just as OSX was the breakaway point for 601/604-based Macs. Yes, a G4 or G3 can boot into Tiger and may run nearly as well as it did under Panther, but it can't really take advantage of the technologies that separate Tiger from Panther. I just don't see the point of buying it for a G4 or G3, not unless you want to shell out big bucks for a Radeon 9800.

Fine, then you have justified the reasons for why Tiger is not for you but there is not reason for you to wreak havic on other's parades. YOU don't need Tiger's main features. YOU don't cover a whole nation of people in the computing world. YOU don't have the same tastes and needs as others do. It's rude for you to make others feel that they wasted their money upgrading to a new OS.
A Mercedes may seem useless to me but important to you, it doesn't mean I think you wasted your money.
If you think Tiger is overhyped with no improvements then don't buy, you have a choice.

[malvolio]

I am purely delighted with Tiger on my lowly G4.
As hldan noted, the biggest speed increases are in areas that are not immediately obvious.
And all the added functionality in apps like Mail, Disk Utility, Safari, etc., etc. is definitely a big plus.

[TopQuark]

Fine, then you have justified the reasons for why Tiger is not for you but there is not reason for you to wreak havic on other's parades.

Even in the Mac world, people have a right to a dissenting opinion.

YOU don't need Tiger's main features. YOU don't cover a whole nation of people in the computing world. YOU don't have the same tastes and needs as others do.

Tiger might eventually turn out to be a good upgrade for G5 owners, but given all the bugs, I wouldn't even recommend it for G5s right now.

It's rude for you to make others feel that they wasted their money upgrading to a new OS.

Pointing out the truth is not rude.

A Mercedes may seem useless to me but important to you, it doesn't mean I think you wasted your money. If you think Tiger is overhyped with no improvements then don't buy, you have a choice.

How can be people be expected to make a choice without knowing all the facts?

I am purely delighted with Tiger on my lowly G4.

Hopefully you'll feel the same way after you wind up with corrupted a DVD or CD. Tiger no longer creates a disk image during burning, which can result in data corruption.

[malvolio]

Originally Posted by TopQuark

Pointing out the truth is not rude.

Believing that your individual experience constitutes "the truth" is quite an unjustified assumption.

[randallina2001]

Loaded Tiger on my YIKES!, 400Mhz, 384 mb ram. MUCH snappier than Panther, flawless install, everything works, user switching now instant instead of my normal 1 second lag, widgets update in 2 seconds. PhotoShop even opens faster. I opened my entire Adobe Creative Suite, all my Office apps, and all my Apple apps trying my best to crash it. The best I could do was a surprise safari quit.

And on top of this, the entire OS only took 21 minutes to install. Panther took an hour. What a great product, thanks Apple!

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by TopQuark

Hopefully you'll feel the same way after you wind up with corrupted a DVD or CD. Tiger no longer creates a disk image during burning, which can result in data corruption.

Can you explain this problem in more detail? How does not creating a temporary disk image cause data corruption?

[Dog Like Nature]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

Can you explain this problem in more detail? How does not creating a temporary disk image cause data corruption?

I'm guessing the original poster is talking about a buffer underrun, where (due to the entire image not being created beforehand) the stream of data to be written dries up momentarily, and the burner is starved, but still writing -- hence a corrupted disc.

[Chuckit]

But it's not like creating a disk image beforehand prevents buffer underruns. A well-done implementation should not get buffer underruns in either case. A lousy implemenetation, likewise, could get them in either case.