Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Software - Troubleshooting and Discussion > macOS > questions for people with leopard

questions for people with leopard
Thread Tools
vtboyarc
Forum Regular
Join Date: May 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 21, 2007, 08:54 PM
 
I have some questions for people that have leopard. I have a macbook 2.16Ghz with 2gb of ram.
does leopard have snappier, faster performance than tiger? Or does it make mac's slower and more sluggish?
does it have major bugs? have there been updates for it to fix any bugs?
is it worth getting soon, or should I wait awhile?(and when) thanks!
     
JustinHorne
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jun 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 21, 2007, 09:06 PM
 
I don't notice much of a performance change at all, some people see an improvement. No MAJOR bugs, that I know of.

There has been one bug fix, 10.5.1, and that fixed the only big bug that I know of.

I'd get it.
     
Cold Warrior
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Polwaristan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 21, 2007, 09:12 PM
 
On your Mac, I bet you'd see a slight speed improvement. Leopard has definitely improved my Macbook Pro 2.16, 2GB RAM.
     
yikes600
Forum Regular
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Stay classy San Diego
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 21, 2007, 09:25 PM
 
G4 1.4GHz here... I upgraded to leopard a couple days ago and was immediately struck by how slow it seemed — I didn't realize it was just Spotlight indexing for 2 hours. Now, the speed seems identical to Tiger.
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 21, 2007, 09:45 PM
 
Aside from the disappearing desktops I haven't noted any other big bugs yet.

It's lighter on RAM than Tiger was, particularly in multiuser environments. Can't say it's any snappier.
     
JustinHorne
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jun 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 21, 2007, 09:53 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cold Warrior View Post
On your Mac, I bet you'd see a slight speed improvement. Leopard has definitely improved my Macbook Pro 2.16, 2GB RAM.
Everyone keeps saying that. I believe you, really, I just didn't notice any difference myself... Maybe it's because most of the stuff I do involves encoding and processing, so I am used to quantitative speed differences, and don't notice the "well, that window opened faster than normal" stuff... Weird.
     
Cold Warrior
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Polwaristan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 21, 2007, 10:06 PM
 
what kind of Mac do you have?
     
Brass
Professional Poster
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 21, 2007, 10:26 PM
 
No significant difference in speed for me either, both on a 2.0 GHz MacBook, and a 2.6 (?) GHz iMac.
     
::maroma::
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: PDX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 21, 2007, 10:53 PM
 
Seems a bit snappier to me, but that also might be because I did a fresh install (wipe and install), which I always do with major upgrades. That obviously cleans out the clutter. But the other features are far worth the upgrade, IMO. Its pretty solid, with few issues/bugs that I know of. You might hate Stacks, but so does everyone else so join the club.
     
JustinHorne
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jun 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 21, 2007, 11:20 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cold Warrior View Post
what kind of Mac do you have?
Me?
If so, MB 2.0 C2D, 2GB.
     
vtboyarc  (op)
Forum Regular
Join Date: May 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 22, 2007, 12:11 AM
 
sweet folks thanks for the info.....why is stacks so bad? it looks cool what I've seen
     
C.A.T.S. CEO
Professional Poster
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: eating kernel
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 22, 2007, 12:17 AM
 
Originally Posted by vtboyarc View Post
sweet folks thanks for the info.....why is stacks so bad? it looks cool what I've seen
The only thing I hear from all the whining is that it shows the 1st file in a folder you put on the dock, so if you put the folder Applications on the dock you'll see the 1st app in your applications folder. This seems to confuse some people into thinking the Applications folder is the 1st app in the folder.
Signature depreciated.
     
::maroma::
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: PDX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 22, 2007, 01:27 AM
 
Its a bit more than that. They completely removed the old way of how a folder would function in the dock. My biggest issue is that the contextual menu type of navigation for a folder/stack is gone. Bring that back and I will hug Stacks every night before I go to sleep. Other people have other complaints.

But like anything, some people like it and others don't.
     
C.A.T.S. CEO
Professional Poster
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: eating kernel
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 22, 2007, 02:35 AM
 
Originally Posted by ::maroma:: View Post
Its a bit more than that. They completely removed the old way of how a folder would function in the dock. My biggest issue is that the contextual menu type of navigation for a folder/stack is gone. Bring that back and I will hug Stacks every night before I go to sleep. Other people have other complaints.

But like anything, some people like it and others don't.
Ah, good point.
Signature depreciated.
     
analogika
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 888500128
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 22, 2007, 03:32 AM
 
On the whole, the speed improvement on this MacBook C2Duo is more of a subtle thing.

There are a couple of things that are DRASTICALLY faster - airport menu, networking, Spotlight, and application launching come to mind. Word, for example, seems to load a lot faster, as well.

Overall, it seems more polished and yes, "snappy" - just a little more nimble.

A lot of that also has to do with the fact that I constantly have lots and lots of stuff open, and memory management seems MUCH improved under Leopard.

So if you're used to intensive memory paging-out, Leopard will be a lot faster.
     
JustinHorne
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jun 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 22, 2007, 03:34 AM
 
Originally Posted by analogika View Post
On the whole, the speed improvement on this MacBook C2Duo is more of a subtle thing.

There are a couple of things that are DRASTICALLY faster - airport menu, networking, Spotlight, and application launching come to mind. Word, for example, seems to load a lot faster, as well.

Overall, it seems more polished and yes, "snappy" - just a little more nimble.

A lot of that also has to do with the fact that I constantly have lots and lots of stuff open, and memory management seems MUCH improved under Leopard.

So if you're used to intensive memory paging-out, Leopard will be a lot faster.
Oh, that's true, the Airport menu IS very much faster.
     
CaptainHaddock
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Nagoya, Japan • 日本 名古屋市
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 22, 2007, 03:53 AM
 
Definite improvements in speed and responsiveness on my Macbook Pro 2.33. Leopard is also smarter about using multiple CPU cores.
     
Gavin
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Seattle
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 23, 2007, 02:07 AM
 
Menus are faster for me.
The file sharing interface is much, much better.

No major bugs but a few annoyances:
Spotlight isn't finding things it found in tiger - I think it has trouble with files that have no suffix. I have years of quick text notes and it can't find any of them.

It also has this thing where the active window looses focus at random.
You can take the dude out of So Cal, but you can't take the dude outta the dude, dude!
     
carterx
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 23, 2007, 12:17 PM
 
Originally Posted by vtboyarc View Post
I have some questions for people that have leopard. I have a macbook 2.16Ghz with 2gb of ram.
does leopard have snappier, faster performance than tiger? Or does it make mac's slower and more sluggish?
does it have major bugs? have there been updates for it to fix any bugs?
is it worth getting soon, or should I wait awhile?(and when) thanks!
I have the same laptop/ram as you and I have not really noticed a decrease. perhaps a small increase, but nothing to write home about. I think Leopard is a worth while OS to change to if your on an Intel Mac computer. If on a PPC, may want to think it over. I cleared a HD and installed it on my Mirrored 1.25ghz / 2GB ram and ran for a few days but found it a bit sluggish compared to Tiger and so I stayed Tiger.

my $0.02

.
     
Richard Richard
Junior Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2007, 09:52 AM
 
the feature i really love is spaces , it's amazing
mac 4 evaah
     
Kevin
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2007, 01:19 PM
 
spaces and hiding applications seem to work a lot a like.
     
MacosNerd
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2007, 01:23 PM
 
I cannot say if Leopard is faster (or slower). I like spaces and it makes me work faster so my efficiency has increased with the install of Leopard.
     
Hal Itosis
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2007, 02:29 PM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
spaces and hiding applications seem to work a lot a like.
 
Sorta depends on how the user has configured his spaces, don't it?
I currently see Spaces as working 9 times better than basic "hiding".
-HI-
     
wr11
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Victoria, BC, Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2007, 03:19 PM
 
A good bit snappier for me on my MacPro and a little of both on my older 12 powerbook. I think the main thing that makes leopard feel snappier is the finder - it's so much more responsive than it used to be.
     
JKT
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: London, UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2007, 04:02 PM
 
Originally Posted by Gavin View Post
It also has this thing where the active window looses focus at random.
One of the changes in Leopard is that Exposé causes the window under the mouse pointer to gain focus, so if you accidentally activate Exposé (e.g. I'm doing it quite often as a first time mighty mouse user), you can inadvertently switch to the wrong window merely because it happens to sit under the pointer while being exposed. This explains some instances of this for me. Others are due to Spaces - for some reason, the wrong window often is at the front when I switch back and forth between them.
     
analogika
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 888500128
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2007, 04:03 PM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
spaces and hiding applications seem to work a lot a like.
Not at all.

As in, not at ALL.

Really. They have absolutely NOTHING in common in my usage - and I used to hide applications ALL THE TIME up until Exposé.

I love Spaces, despite a couple of minor quirks (such as occasionally automatically switching to a different space when I mount a .dmg in the Finder), which I can well live with.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2007, 05:28 PM
 
I love Time Machine and I like Spaces much better than I thought I would. I have only two Spaces, that seems to be the sweet spot. Leopard is smooth sailing and I really like the Finder now. It's noticeably more responsive. Quick View is great for previewing and is fast. Helps me sort pdf, for example. Even the icon previews are more helpful than I thought. Stacks are quite nice, IMHO much more useful than diving through whole directory trees (although I wish you could have this as a third option instead of stacks). Honestly, Leopard is (with the exception of Time Machine and perhaps spaces) a polished version of Tiger. Time Machine itself justifies the upgrade for me.
( Last edited by OreoCookie; Nov 26, 2007 at 06:04 PM. )
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
treday630
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jun 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2007, 08:45 PM
 
I noticed a big difference between Leopard and Tiger. It seems a lot more snappier than Tiger did. Now it could be due me choosing the "erase and install" route.

Also keep in mind the Leopard was design to take advantage of the multi-core chips.


I have a 2.2ghz MacBook Pro w/ 2gig Ram.
     
monkeybrain
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Dark Side of the Moon
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2007, 10:24 PM
 
Has anyone with Macbooks noticed if Leopard causes any more fan usage? Since Leopard pushes more things to the graphics card (or pseudo-graphics card) I'm reasoning the fan will kick in more (just like when I play any game, even old Starcraft, or watch any movie, or there is a lot of flash on the page).
( Last edited by monkeybrain; Nov 27, 2007 at 10:04 PM. )
     
carterx
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2007, 11:17 PM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
spaces and hiding applications seem to work a lot a like.
For me, I don't really care for spaces. with the laptop I just use "how all windows" and I just then select where I want to be. Works great with a mouse. Just have the mouse ball button set as show all windows, select the app I want and go. Works very quick and I find faster than spaces work working on a number of tasks.
     
analogika
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 888500128
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 27, 2007, 04:52 AM
 
Originally Posted by carterx View Post
For me, I don't really care for spaces. with the laptop I just use "how all windows" and I just then select where I want to be. Works great with a mouse. Just have the mouse ball button set as show all windows, select the app I want and go. Works very quick and I find faster than spaces work working on a number of tasks.
But becomes rather useless once you have more than about ten windows open (which I always do).

I find Exposé *much* more useful when it only shows me the windows I'm currently working with in my active space (e.g. in my "office" space, there's only Address Book, Mail, iCal, and Stickies, and not the clutter of Safari windows and production tools. Likewise, in my production environment, I can show all windows using Exposé and not have to squint through Address Book, Mail, iCal, a dozen Stickies, iTunes and Safari).
     
Gavin
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Seattle
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 27, 2007, 06:11 PM
 
Originally Posted by gavin
It also has this thing where the active window looses focus at random.
Originally Posted by JKT View Post
One of the changes in Leopard is that Exposé causes the window under the mouse pointer to gain focus, so if you accidentally activate Exposé (e.g. I'm doing it quite often as a first time mighty mouse user), you can inadvertently switch to the wrong window merely because it happens to sit under the pointer while being exposed. This explains some instances of this for me. Others are due to Spaces - for some reason, the wrong window often is at the front when I switch back and forth between them.
Actually, it does it if I'm not even touching the machine, and the mouse is over the window that looses focus. It's really weird. I wonder if it's trying to pop up an alert but then doesn't paint the pop up window, like a disembodied cry for help.

What if it's haunted?
You can take the dude out of So Cal, but you can't take the dude outta the dude, dude!
     
sc_markt
Forum Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern Ca.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 28, 2007, 10:05 PM
 
Originally Posted by vtboyarc View Post
I have some questions for people that have leopard. I have a macbook 2.16Ghz with 2gb of ram.
does leopard have snappier, faster performance than tiger? Or does it make mac's slower and more sluggish?
does it have major bugs? have there been updates for it to fix any bugs?
is it worth getting soon, or should I wait awhile?(and when) thanks!
I've also got a 2.16MBP (firewire 800, 1Gig ram) and Leopard definitely is faster.

The only significant bugs I've noticed are the following 3:
1) Keyboard sometimes stopped working until I logged out and back in.
2) Dashboard stopped working about a week ago but is now working again.
3) I once was in the finder and when I changed a view, I noticed that the window didn't show all the files. I sent this to Apple.

One thing that concerns me are the changes to the firewall but I think this isn't as big an issue was when it was first brought up (but I could be wrong).

My personal opinion of Leopard: It's Apple's best OS ever.

- Mark
     
   
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:48 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,