Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Chuckit · May 21, 2009, 03:52 PM

So any software that is not perfect is "buggy" and not worth paying for?

Koralatov · May 21, 2009, 04:08 PM

Originally Posted by cgc

Yours.

Hot damn. I knew my turn would come eventually.

Originally Posted by Simon

People aren't being fooled into anything. If you're happy with Leopard, stay there. Same goes for Tiger. Everybody else will enjoy the benefits of SL for $129. It's really just that simple.

Amen to that. People seem to be forgetting there’s a difference between mandatory and optional; Apple’s not forcing anyone to upgrade from Tiger or Leopard — it’s 100% optional. Your Mac will still work just as well as it always did if you leave it on Tiger. It’s just that it might work better if you upgrade to SL.

Personally, if the performance improvements are half what they’re supposed to be, I’ll happily fork over the cash. I upgraded my MBP to Leopard because I wanted better performance, not because I wanted Spaces.

JKT · May 21, 2009, 05:01 PM

Originally Posted by Chuckit

Apple has said, "Leopard is a buggy OS"? I must have missed that story. Link?

What Big Mac said - Apple have basically informed all users of Leopard that 10.5 is bug-riddled as the prima facie rationale for SL is as a stability and bug-fixing release, rather than as a feature enhancing one.

Originally Posted by Simon

People aren't being fooled into anything. If you're happy with Leopard, stay there.

But that is the whole problem. I am not happy with Leopard and I damned well don't want to stay there. The number of bugs I encounter with this version every single effing day is getting unbearable. Seven flipping point versions later and the vast majority are still there getting on my tits day-in, day-out... and Apple are likely to charge full price for me to benefit from fixes that might (or might not, who knows with Apple these days) make it into SL rather than Leopard? You are right, I am not going to be fooled by anything as Leopard could very well be the last "upgrade" I am stupid enough to buy from Apple.

0157988944 · May 21, 2009, 05:03 PM

Not at all.... Snow Leopard implies nothing about Leopard other than that OS X, as an OS nearing a decade old, it needs under the hood cleaning and streamlining. Apple has never said anything about Leopard in relationship to Snow Leopard.

Simon · May 21, 2009, 05:22 PM

Originally Posted by JKT

But that is the whole problem. I am not happy with Leopard and I damned well don't want to stay there.

Then pay for SL and shut up. But please for the love of God stop acting like you're entitled to some kind of special treatment. You got what you paid for. Now deal with it.

Seriously, if Apple would listen to people like you they'd stop developing OS X right now. Is that what you really want? Thought so.

Chuckit · May 21, 2009, 05:30 PM

Originally Posted by JKT

What Big Mac said - Apple have basically informed all users of Leopard that 10.5 is bug-riddled as the prima facie rationale for SL is as a stability and bug-fixing release, rather than as a feature enhancing one.

News flash: Software has bugs. Of course some will get fixed in future versions. However, Snow Leopard is not primarily billed as a "stability and bug-fixing release." From Apple's intro to Snow Leopard:

Snow Leopard … builds on Leopard’s enormous innovations by delivering a new generation of core software technologies that will streamline Mac OS X, enhance its performance, and set new standards for quality. Snow Leopard dramatically reduces the footprint of Mac OS X, making it even more efficient for users, and giving them back valuable hard drive space for their music and photos.

You're the one saying it's all about bugfixes and stability. Apple says it's about performance, efficiency and preparing for the future.

- - e r i k - - · May 21, 2009, 07:30 PM

Leopard is buggy? ****, I wish someone would have told me that before I upgraded my mission critical motion graphics workhouse that needs to be capable of running the full FCP suite and most of Adobe's Creative Suite at once.

Oh wait, I upgraded that day one and I haven't had much of any problems since…

cwkmacuser · May 21, 2009, 08:11 PM

Leopard is not really that buggy. Except for the infrequent crash of a program, it's pretty stable.

Big Mac · May 21, 2009, 09:00 PM

Originally Posted by JKT

I am not happy with Leopard and I damned well don't want to stay there. The number of bugs I encounter with this version every single effing day is getting unbearable.

Could you be more specific, JKT? Like the rest who have responded to you, I'm not unhappy with Leopard. It has been essentially problem-free for me on my G5.

Proudest Monkey · May 21, 2009, 10:08 PM

Originally Posted by Simon

Then pay for SL and shut up. But please for the love of God stop acting like you're entitled to some kind of special treatment. You got what you paid for. Now deal with it.

Seriously, if Apple would listen to people like you they'd stop developing OS X right now. Is that what you really want? Thought so.

No one is asking for special treatment - people are asking to not pay for a full upgrade when they feel they aren't getting a full upgrade - just fixes.

If Apple announces a price point lower than 129.95 are you going to go to the Apple Store and beg them to charge you 129.95? Didn't think so.

Chuckit · May 21, 2009, 11:15 PM

Originally Posted by Proudest Monkey

No one is asking for special treatment - people are asking to not pay for a full upgrade when they feel they aren't getting a full upgrade - just fixes.

This attitude is the reason so much software gets to be bloated and horrible. If you spend time actually improving the software on a fundamental level, people are like, "It's just fixes. I don't want to pay." So instead they load it up with useless crap that doesn't help anybody because people are more willing to pay for that than real improvements.

I think it would be great if Apple did offer Snow Leopard at a discount. But I also think it's sad that people devalue quality so much.

Simon · May 22, 2009, 02:51 AM

Originally Posted by Proudest Monkey

No one is asking for special treatment - people are asking to not pay for a full upgrade when they feel they aren't getting a full upgrade - just fixes.

That is special treatment, by definition. What people "feel" is entirely irrelevant. Fact is SL is not a bug fix for a broken product. Everybody knew what they were buying with Lopard and they got exactly that. End of transaction. SL is a new deal and again you get to decide if you want it or not.

Personally I'd rather see Apple continue development of OS X because its profitable than cater to a few penny pinching whiners who "feel" the world owes them.

Person Man · 09:25 AM

Originally Posted by Big Mac

Could you be more specific, JKT? Like the rest who have responded to you, I'm not unhappy with Leopard. It has been essentially problem-free for me on my G5.

Same here. No problems with Leopard at all on any of my machines... G5 (until it died-- memory controller failed), Mac Pro, iMacs at work, and MacBook Pro.

EDIT: by the way, JKT... don't just list obscure bugs. You need to tell us how many bugs you encounter on a typical day and how they specifically impact you and make your experience "unbearable." (your words).

Person Man · May 22, 2009, 09:23 AM

Originally Posted by Chuckit

This attitude is the reason so much software gets to be bloated and horrible. If you spend time actually improving the software on a fundamental level, people are like, "It's just fixes. I don't want to pay." So instead they load it up with useless crap that doesn't help anybody because people are more willing to pay for that than real improvements..

Basically, Apple is screwed either way.

A new, "bloated" feature laden operating system is introduced at full price, and people complain that the new features aren't worth it, the operating system has too many bugs, they're sacrificing bug fixes and a streamlined OS for features, etc... and say that it's not worth what they are charging for it because of that.

Then, when Apple does what they're doing with Snow Leopard, trying to streamline the OS, modernize it for the next 10 years, reduce it's footprint in memory and on the hard drive, and fix plenty of bugs, while still introducing a few new features, people complain that it's not worth the full price either.

I, for one, will be more than happy to pay whatever price Apple feels it needs to charge for a copy of Snow Leopard, and I won't be complaining about it either.

JKT · May 22, 2009, 02:31 PM

Ah, ffs, I just wrote a mammothly long response and the forum timed out on me so I lost it...

Anyway, a now shortened version. In summary, try using Spaces, running as a non-admin account and using a combination of List and Column view in the Finder for more than a few weeks. If you find that you have no problems with this in Leopard, I'll be utterly amazed.

Here's a post I wrote at the OmniGroup forum a few weeks ago that lists just some of the issues I experience with Leopard each day or multiple times a week. Warning: it is a long post (and it is only a few of the problems I have). A few caveats before people jump in to say "bad RAM" or "APE/hacked system" or "doesn't happen to me" or "bad install" or whatever excuse you want to make that puts the blame on me rather than Apple:

Each of these problems happen on the three different Macs that are in my household. Each was a different type of installation at a different period over the course of the past year and each has a different degree of software installed on it. Only two have any form of hack on them (my iMac and Powerbook) but that is just MenuCracker which permits third party menu items to install in the left of the menubar, which undoubtedly most other users of OS X have installed too without even realising it. Input Managers and APE have not (dis)graced my Macs since the early days of 10.2. One of the Macs is about as plain vanilla an install you can get and it has very little in the way of third party software installed so it should run "perfectly". The plain vanilla iMac was an archive and install, and my iMac was an archive and install (following a Migration Assistant duplication of content from a PPC Mac when it initially had Tiger on it). I have tried combo updaters in place of software update and the Powerbook has undergone a wipe and install of the OS, with newly installed apps and documents only copied to it (no prefs). I still have the same problems on all three. None of these were problems I experienced in Tiger. Not one.

JKT · May 22, 2009, 02:58 PM

Originally Posted by Chuckit

News flash: Software has bugs. Of course some will get fixed in future versions.

My problem with Leopard is not that it has some bugs, but that it has more bugs (and more in my face ones) than previous versions instead of less.

You're the one saying it's all about bugfixes and stability. Apple says it's about performance, efficiency and preparing for the future.

My mistake. Snow Leopard is all about bug fixes and stability (or "quality" as Apple puts it), and also performance, efficiency and preparing for the future.

AppleGirl1990 · Jun 1, 2009, 02:16 PM

Gettting closer and closer to SL release date.
Evenyone seems to be "MUM" on blu-ray support....

Abit667 · Jun 1, 2009, 10:21 PM

So, is there a definite answer yet as to if Snow Leopard will run on PPC or be x86(_64) only? The Apple SL page doesn't mention anything.

- - e r i k - - · Jun 2, 2009, 01:44 AM

I think we can safely say that PPC Macs are outdated now and that no more resources should be wasted supporting them. They had their time in the sun. Get over it.

Chuckit · Jun 2, 2009, 03:53 AM

Originally Posted by Abit667

So, is there a definite answer yet as to if Snow Leopard will run on PPC or be x86(_64) only? The Apple SL page doesn't mention anything.

It's not official, but it's been known for quite a while that Snow Leopard requires an Intel Mac.

AppleGirl1990 · Jun 2, 2009, 07:05 AM

I loved my old PPC, but my current Intel processor kicks it's butt. Accept raw speed, sacrifice nothing -- upgrade if you haven't already!

P · Jun 2, 2009, 11:47 AM

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - -

I think we can safely say that PPC Macs are outdated now and that no more resources should be wasted supporting them. They had their time in the sun. Get over it.

In general, I disagree. Compiling the OS for more than one platform is a good way of keeping the code quality high (Apple kept making x86 copies of OS X long before the switch was on the roadmap) and performance is no reason to draw the line there: the last PM G5s beat the first Core Duos quite handily, for instance. In this particular case most of the SL features are focused on multicore CPUs and modern GPUs and simply don't bring any big improvements for the G5s, so it's more understandable if they keep supporting Leopard in a timely fashion. Be wary of declaring three year old computers obsolete. Apple used to provide OS updates for 11 years in some cases, and expecting a three year upgrade cycle will hurt them in the long run.

Proudest Monkey · Jun 8, 2009, 01:51 PM

Originally Posted by Proudest Monkey

Charge Tiger users more because they are getting more ... Leopard + SL. Something in Leopard did not entice them to upgrade, maybe SL would push them over towards upgrading.

Tiger Users - 129.95
Leopard - 59.95

Sorry Chuckit, Sorry Simon

I guess I was $30.00 off ... but I do love being right.

AppleGirl1990 · Jun 8, 2009, 01:54 PM

So, it looks like SL is going to be $29 and released in September. Such a low price. Everyone should upgrade!

JKT · Jun 8, 2009, 01:56 PM

It is $30 for Leopard owners. Not everyone.

Good ;-)

JKT · Jun 8, 2009, 01:58 PM

... and that is only Intel Leopard owners (no PPC, as expected).

Hal Itosis · Jun 8, 2009, 02:00 PM

Apple will ship Snow Leopard in September. Single licenses will be $29 and the five-license Family Pack will cost $49.

By my math, the family pack works out to less than 10 bucks a pop!

rickey939 · Jun 8, 2009, 02:23 PM

Love the price, wow Apple...wow.

Chuckit · Jun 8, 2009, 02:51 PM

Originally Posted by Proudest Monkey

Sorry Chuckit, Sorry Simon

I guess I was $30.00 off ... but I do love being right.

No need to apologize to me — I'm running Leopard on a MacBook Pro. It's the Tiger users who are being pointlessly bent over.

I thought it was a dumb idea and I still do.

Proudest Monkey · Jun 8, 2009, 03:09 PM

Originally Posted by Chuckit

No need to apologize to me — I'm running Leopard on a MacBook Pro. It's the Tiger users who are being pointlessly bent over.

I thought it was a dumb idea and I still do.

I was apologizing because I was right and you were wrong and you went on a big holier than though rant about how people like me ruin software upgrades and blah blah blah -- but Apple did just what I thought they would do by following my logic and not yours.

Now, if you feel like you want to pay more I can give you a paypal account which will gladly accept your additional $100.

Dakar V · Jun 8, 2009, 03:13 PM

Good thing you won't sully the victory by being a giant douche or anything.

slugslugslug · Jun 8, 2009, 03:34 PM

I wonder how they're going to handle the upgrade thing? Just have the installer check for Leopard on the target HD? Or will you need to provide some kind of proof that you've bought Leopard (or a Mac w/it preinstalled) to buy SL at the $29 price?

zacharydz · Jun 8, 2009, 04:07 PM

Originally Posted by slugslugslug

I wonder how they're going to handle the upgrade thing? Just have the installer check for Leopard on the target HD? Or will you need to provide some kind of proof that you've bought Leopard (or a Mac w/it preinstalled) to buy SL at the $29 price?

My guess is if you are running an intel system, the SL installation disk will simply allow a clean installation. I think it would be an awfully cumbersome process to require Leopard to be installed first, only then to be upgraded. Basically all but the first generation or so of Intel macs shipped with leopard, so they might let first generation macs on tiger slip in.

AppleGirl1990 · Jun 8, 2009, 04:30 PM

i can't believe there is no blu-ray support.
i'm going to rip my hair out!

Chuckit · Jun 8, 2009, 04:42 PM

Originally Posted by slugslugslug

I wonder how they're going to handle the upgrade thing? Just have the installer check for Leopard on the target HD? Or will you need to provide some kind of proof that you've bought Leopard (or a Mac w/it preinstalled) to buy SL at the $29 price?

With previous upgrade versions, it just checked for the presence of the previous system.

Todd Madson · Jun 8, 2009, 05:00 PM

I knew I made a bad decision when I got my G5 just months before they announced the intel switch.

But I didn't have a freakin' choice. My G4 was totally expired, I needed to do something.

I wonder if there's an economic stimulus to buy a new mac or the like? I can't justify $2000+ on a MacPro
that's for sure.

Proudest Monkey · Jun 8, 2009, 05:54 PM

Originally Posted by Dakar V

Good thing you won't sully the victory by being a giant douche or anything.

don't mind if I do

Spheric Harlot · Jun 8, 2009, 06:11 PM

Originally Posted by AppleGirl1990

i can't believe there is no blu-ray support.
i'm going to rip my hair out!

Be sure to post it on YouTube!

Spheric Harlot · Jun 8, 2009, 06:14 PM

Originally Posted by zacharydz

My guess is if you are running an intel system, the SL installation disk will simply allow a clean installation. I think it would be an awfully cumbersome process to require Leopard to be installed first, only then to be upgraded. Basically all but the first generation or so of Intel macs shipped with leopard, so they might let first generation macs on tiger slip in.

The first Intels came in January '06, the plastic MacBook in May. Leopard was released late October the following year.

Eriamjh · Jun 8, 2009, 06:30 PM

My MacBook Pro CD is finally obsolete. Core CL is not supported.

dru · Jun 8, 2009, 09:37 PM

Originally Posted by Eriamjh

My MacBook Pro CD is finally obsolete. Core CL is not supported.

My year old iMac isn't supported either.

I'm not too happy about that.

Eriamjh · Jun 8, 2009, 09:43 PM

Originally Posted by dru

My year old iMac isn't supported either.

I'm not too happy about that.

Youch! I was wondering where the line would be drawn on video support. It was drawn pretty close.

It's only $30, but I may wait until I buy a new machine. Both my MacBook and CD iMac are not fully supported and neither are 64-bit. Both are nearly 3 years old and still work quite well.

turtle777 · Jun 9, 2009, 12:03 AM

Originally Posted by dru

My year old iMac isn't supported either.

I'm not too happy about that.

Same here. That's truly disappointing.

-t

- - e r i k - - · Jun 9, 2009, 12:43 AM

Originally Posted by AppleGirl1990

i can't believe there is no blu-ray support.
i'm going to rip my hair out!

Why? It's a dead end format and I'm glad Apple continues to ensure it's demise sooner rather than later.

- - e r i k - - · Jun 9, 2009, 12:46 AM

Originally Posted by dru

My year old iMac isn't supported either.

I'm not too happy about that.

Where's the list of supported graphics cards?

cwkmacuser · Jun 9, 2009, 12:46 AM

I heard a rumor that SL was supposed to be launched today. Obviously, that didn't happen, but did anyone else hear that?

Chuckit · Jun 9, 2009, 12:49 AM

Originally Posted by Eriamjh

Youch! I was wondering where the line would be drawn on video support. It was drawn pretty close.

I suspect how long ago it was made doesn't matter as much as who made the graphics card. OpenCL is heavily based on Nvidia's CUDA technology, so all Nvidia cards support it while almost no ATI cards do. The only ATI cards supported are the ones currently offered in the Mac Pro and iMac.

TheoCryst · Jun 9, 2009, 12:58 AM

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - -

Where's the list of supported graphics cards?

Apple - Mac OS X Snow Leopard - Technical specifications -- Under OpenCL:

NVIDIA Geforce 8600M GT, GeForce 8800 GT, GeForce 8800 GTS, Geforce 9400M, GeForce 9600M GT, GeForce GT 120, GeForce GT 130.
ATI Radeon 4850, Radeon 4870

Simon · Jun 9, 2009, 03:15 AM

Originally Posted by Chuckit

With previous upgrade versions, it just checked for the presence of the previous system.

I hope they don't do it that way this time. I would hate having to install Leopard first just to get SL. What's the benefit of having 45% less install time in SL when you need to install Leopard first?

I was hoping I could give them my Leopard serial no. to qualify for the upgrade and then receive a regular SL install DVD.

Big Mac · Jun 9, 2009, 03:37 AM

Originally Posted by AppleGirl1990

i can't believe there is no blu-ray support.
i'm going to rip my hair out!

I think you need an antidepressant.