[The Placid Casual]

or has anyone else been totally underwhelmed by this update? I'd even go as far as to say I am totally disappointed!

I have used it since release now, and decided to hold off on posting opinions, but after yet another Mail crash and finder crash, the time has come to post.

My main gripe? The finder... and just how damn slow it is! I am using a 2.0 MBP (256Mb bto graphics upgrade), and the finder responsiveness just feels so much slower than Tiger I just opened my 'applications' folder which has say 67 apps in there. I had to sit and wait while it updated the info in 'List' view. (app size, description etc)

I am constantly facing more Airport issues than I used to, with all connections frequently dropping out, and also way more application crashes. On top of this, the machine runs *much* hotter all the time, with way more base cpu usage.

I have checked and double checked my machine, but all in all, I really feel there is no tangible benefit for me to have upgraded this time around!

Wondering how everyone else feels about 10.5?

[analogika]

Something is wrong with your install.

Do an Archive and Install, and make sure any and all drivers you have installed are explicitly Leopard-compatible.

[Cold Warrior]

I love it. Everything is faster and smoother, including Finder, with Leopard on my MBP C2D 2.16, 2GB RAM. My machine runs quieter -- less fan activity -- and Airport is more stable.

I'm no fanboy, because I was underwhelmed with OS X from the beta through 10.2, then ok with it at 10.3 and pleased beginning with 10.4.

I hate to parrot a standard question, but what sort of upgrade did you do? (archive, upgrade, clean.)

[cgc]

I've seen steady speed increases since the OS X beta days and Leopard is no exception.

[frdmfghtr]

I'll sound off on the "great upgrade" side. I like the new GUI color scheme--feels more professional. I've had zero Airport issues, REALLY like Time Machine, the Finder changes...all in all a positive experience.

I've had very little trouble with the Finder and Mail-a glitch here and there, but nothing severe enough to cause concern (or even remember what the trouble was).

The only thing I like better in Tiger was the Firewall; I preferred Tiger's implementation, which was simply a front-end GUI for ipfw (if I'm wrong, please correct me).

[NeXTLoop]

I've had smooth sailing for the most part. Had a little trouble with FileVault on my initial Leopard install, but after disabling that, everything has been awesome. Its faster than Tiger, more stable, and personally I prefer the more subdued theme as opposed to previous generations.

[Simon]

After I originally installed the 10.5.1 update through SU I experienced some issues. I then went to Apple's website and downloaded the full 10.5.1 update and installed it again. All but one of those issues disappeared after that. And that's on top of a 10.5.0 update install on a system that hasn't seen a clean install since Panther.

I'd try re-applying the 10.5.1 update manually and see if it solves some of your issues. If that doesn't help create a new user account and see if your issues persist. If not the problem lies with your pref files or custom installs on your user account. If that doesn't help either, I'd try a backup and then an A&I.

[lpkmckenna]

Originally Posted by The Placid Casual 

or has anyone else been totally underwhelmed by this update? I'd even go as far as to say I am totally disappointed!

I've been using OS X since the beginning, and I think every update has felt pretty much the same, except for Panther. Expose "changed everything" in a way that nothing else has before or since.

That said, I'm satisfied with Leopard. QuickLook is the best new feature, and I only wish it behaved the way I want it too!

[The Placid Casual]

Thanks for the replies everyone, much appreciated.

I too have used OS X since the original Beta (worked for Apple at the time), and also has the 'underwhelmed feeling pretty much all the way along too, with maybe the exception of 10.2, which for me, made OS X actually workable! Suffice to say, the installs are done correctly, permissions correct, hardware in good shape etc etc

I have installed 10.5 on 2 machines. Both archive installs. An iMac CD 2.0 (2 Partitions, one with 10.4), and my MBP CD 2.0.

The iMac seems fine, but is rarely used, the MBP's issue continue. Maybe I'll just do a totaly clean install and see if that fixes things. Damn frustrating though.

[Richard Richard]

my biggest problem is with the finder and spotlight ,as i've posted before

the view options available to the end user after a search are quite frankly absurd

it's one thing having a fast detailed search , but when the results are only viewable by 3 criteria - more often than not NOT the ones you actually searched by , they defeat the purpose entirely

go ahead and do a search by size and see what i mean...

[bishopazrael]

I did a clean install on my MPB 2ghz Core Duo w/ 2gb of RAM and a 128 mb vid card. I'm not really all that impressed. It does feel a tad slower than 10.4.11 Overall though, I like the changes in finder, except of course for the speed. My finder speed is just not what it should be. I've always thought maybe there's something wrong with this lappy. I'm just not sure what. All my tests come back that everything is OK. But it just feels slower w/ 10.5 on it. Anyways, just my .2 cents.

[Atheist]

I've been less than thrilled with Leopard on my Powerbook G4. I did and Archive and Install. It's slower than Tiger and is just plain flaky. My battery would last for about an hour with Tiger (it's in need of replacing), with Leopard I get maybe 30 minutes at most and typically at about 35% the machine suddenly loses power. Resuming from sleep frequently results in a blank blue screen causing me to have to do a hard shutdown. I get lots of beachballs while using Finder, Safari and Mail. My bluetooth headset constantly disappears under Leopard. It shows up in Bluetooth preferences but isn't available to applications such as Skype. I have to delete it and then set it up again via Bluetooth Setup Assistant. I know there's other things, this is all I can recall off the top of my head. I do have Leopard running on a "hackintosh" and it's been working just fine. I think it just doesn't like my Powerbook.

[voodoo]

So far I am not impressed with 10.5, it is far too buggy. The features themselves are pretty good, but I've never used a version of OS X that needed an update as bad as Leopard 10.5.0/10.5.1 does (because of bugs).

While I am not impressed, I am relatively pleased with Leopard.

V

[Richard Richard]

another thing that's unacceptable is the speed at which the finder copies multiple items

i'm copying some videos to a usb stick and it's hopeless on my mac pro

the odd thing is , when i get to the imac running tiger , the transfer is lightning fast

imo leopard is utter garbage and i really regret wasting my time and money on it , tiger was almost perfect in comparison , partic. the later revisions , this feels like a massive backward step and all they've added is some pointless eye candy to compete with vista

very sad..

[Hal Itosis]

Originally Posted by Richard Richard 

another thing that's unacceptable is the speed at which the finder copies multiple items

i'm copying some videos to a usb stick and it's hopeless on my mac pro

the odd thing is , when i get to the imac running tiger , the transfer is lightning fast

 
Odd is the right word... since this is not a general problem experienced by others,
that situation is unique to *your* configuration. Did you do a clean install of 10.5?

Anyway, sounds like some troubleshooting on your end should fix that right up.

[Hal Itosis]

Originally Posted by Richard Richard 

my biggest problem is with the finder and spotlight ,as i've posted before

the view options available to the end user after a search are quite frankly absurd

it's one thing having a fast detailed search , but when the results are only viewable by 3 criteria - more often than not NOT the ones you actually searched by , they defeat the purpose entirely

go ahead and do a search by size and see what i mean...

 
Word is that 10.5.2 *might* bring some improvement to the view options of Spotlight results.

Chin up.

[ajprice]

Originally Posted by Richard Richard 

another thing that's unacceptable is the speed at which the finder copies multiple items

i'm copying some videos to a usb stick and it's hopeless on my mac pro

the odd thing is , when i get to the imac running tiger , the transfer is lightning fast

May be an obvious point but which USB ports are you using? First thing I thought of when I read your issue was maybe you're using the port on the back of the iMac (USB 2) and the keyboard port on the G5 (USB). That would account for a speed difference from lightning to hopeless.

[peeb]

I don't want to start a holy war here, but what is the deal with you Mac fanatics? I've been sitting here at my freelance gig in front of a Mac (a 8600/300 w/64 Megs of RAM) for about 20 minutes now while it attempts to copy a 17 Meg file from one folder on the hard drive to another folder. 20 minutes. At home, on my Pentium Pro 200 running NT 4, which by all standards should be a lot slower than this Mac, the same operation would take about 2 minutes. If that.

In addition, during this file transfer, Netscape will not work. And everything else has ground to a halt. Even BBEdit Lite is straining to keep up as I type this.

I won't bore you with the laundry list of other problems that I've encountered while working on various Macs, but suffice it to say there have been many, not the least of which is I've never seen a Mac that has run faster than its Wintel counterpart, despite the Macs' faster chip architecture. My 486/66 with 8 megs of ram runs faster than this 300 mhz machine at times. From a productivity standpoint, I don't get how people can claim that the Macintosh is a superior machine.

Mac addicts, flame me if you'd like, but I'd rather hear some intelligent reasons why anyone would choose to use a Mac over other faster, cheaper, more stable systems.

[lpkmckenna]

Originally Posted by peeb 

I've been sitting here at my freelance gig in front of a Mac (a 8600/300 w/64 Megs of RAM)...

Quit your job. Seriously.

At home, on my Pentium Pro 200 running NT 4...

[speechless]

Mac addicts, flame me if you'd like, but I'd rather hear some intelligent reasons why anyone would choose to use a Mac over other faster, cheaper, more stable systems.

Intelligent reason #1: There have been some technical improvements since the 8600.

[peeb]

User:Kadin2048/Slashdot Trolling Phenomena - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[voodoo]

My Mac sucks (kottke.org)

V

[lpkmckenna]

Originally Posted by voodoo 

My Mac sucks (kottke.org)

Ah...

peep's posts are usually devoid of content, I figured he was actually serious. I'm still waiting for him to respond to this: http://forums.macnn.com/95/political...2/#post3566250

[ZakAdelman]

peeb,
Please don't start off with...
"I don't want to start a holy war here, but what is the deal with you Mac fanatics?"
You are asking for a fight and it is not appropriate. Also unless the 8600/300 is running 10.5 (which it can't) this is not the thread to ask this. That said we need a lot more information to even attempt to answer your questions.

Which version of mac?
What are it's minimum requirements?
Which apps are you running?
do they meet the system requirements? (OS, Ram, etc...)

How much ram on the WinNT PC?
What is it's minimum requirements? I am not seeing them anywhere.
Which programs are you running?
do they meet the system requirements? (OS, Ram, Etc...)

From your description you are out of ram. Lets say you have the same OS, you like windows NT so we will compare that. NT4 32mb RAM and NT4 64mb RAM, the latter will run faster, copy faster, have less crashes due to hang ups. Lets assume NT has a minimum of 32mb ram, and you have 64 like you do on the mac. that leaves 32mb of ram for apps when the OS is under load(copying, starting programs, etc...). Your Mac may have a minimum of 64mb which means there is almost nothing left over when it is under heavy load.
the latest BBEdit system requirements...
* Mac OS X 10.4 or later
* Universal Binary (for PowerPC and Intel processors)
* Automator support requires Mac OS X 10.4 or later
you do not meet the requirements for 10.4.x...
* G3, G4, or G5 processor
* Built-in FireWire
* At least 256 MB of RAM
* DVD drive (DVD-ROM), Combo (CD-RW/DVD-ROM) or SuperDrive (DVD-R) for installation
* At least 3 GB of free disk space; 4 GB if you install the XCode 2 Developer Tools.
how can you expect it to keep up, I am assuming you are using an older version of BBEdit so look up it's minimums. You likely don't or barely meet them.

If you are stressing your OS and specifically your ram then you can't compare the 2 computers. Going any further is pointless until you answer the questions above. The highest OS version your ram will allow is 10.0.x.(march 4th 2001) Anything previous is OS9 and there is no comparison to many changes have been made.

If you want "cheap" go for it I prefer the stability I have with my mac. I know other people have different experiences but mine has been great. You are exceeding the available ram, Expect problems, when out of ram the computer will slow down and likely cause a kernel panic.

[lpkmckenna]

Hi Kevin.

[peeb]

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna 

Ah...

peep's posts are usually devoid of content, I figured he was actually serious. I'm still waiting for him to respond to this: http://forums.macnn.com/95/political...2/#post3566250

Nice personal attack - the question you are referring to is a simple piece of research - you'd learn more if you did it yourself than if I do it for you. A library, or a quick Google search, will get you the answer you need.

[Cold Warrior]

Zak,
peeb is pulling your leg. His post was a direct quote from another site (see voodoo's post above).

[bleee]

I didn't expect much from Leopard I have a mac pro 2.66 with 4gb of ram and leopard is well meh... really all I wanted was more stability... I think the one annoyance they fixed was finder beach ball if you put your mac to sleep with network drives connected and it so happens it can't restore the connection after wake from sleep.

I have noticed more crashes from Safari and Mail... I noticed preview will take longer to launch if you feed it a semi corrupt jpeg (it bounces a few times)

Time machine is great if you have enough storage to basically mirror your hard drives.

I was looking for better exchange integration from iCal, Mail and Address book but that didn't happen. I think that was a huge let down from Business users.

This isn't really OS X but I find it extremely dumb that there is no way to "merge" multiple iphoto libraries. I have 3 from formatting various mac laptops and desktops.

It would be nice to be able to sync folders across macs so say your "documents" folder goes with you where ever you go.

[lpkmckenna]

Originally Posted by peeb 

Nice personal attack - the question you are referring to is a simple piece of research - you'd learn more if you did it yourself than if I do it for you. A library, or a quick Google search, will get you the answer you need.

I don't need to do any research on the issue - I'm already correct. And since you aren't too familiar with other human beings, I have a tip for you: four word statements like "that is not true" don't motivate others to go the library, do Google searches, or anything else. I don't even know what I ought to be researching, since I specifically asked you "which part" was incorrect. And I still don't know which part you think is incorrect.

The real reason you didn't reply: you can't substantiate. Your posts are usually devoid of content, including the very post I'm now responding to.

EDITED for smarminess.

[Cold Warrior]

Stay on topic and don't pollute this thread with pol/war lounge stuff.

[lpkmckenna]

I'm giving Leopard's new features more leeway. I created a bunch of Stacks and found them really useful for app-launching.

It does seem to kernel-panic more than Tiger, though, mostly in Safari.

[Hal Itosis]

Originally Posted by peeb 

I don't want to start a holy war here, but what is the deal with you Mac fanatics? I've been sitting here at my freelance gig in front of a Mac (a 8600/300 w/64 Megs of RAM) for about 20 minutes now while it attempts to copy a 17 Meg file from one folder on the hard drive to another folder. 20 minutes.

You meant "Gig" (gigabytes) right?
Else, maybe this is a ridiculously extreme example of "free-space fragmentation".

Plus -- if it's the same drive -- it doesn't copy, it moves (changes directory listing).
Perhaps some routine maintenance [[gulp]] with Disk Utility is called for (once in a lifetime).

Originally Posted by peeb 

I won't bore you with the laundry list of other problems that I've encountered while working on various Macs, but suffice it to say there have been many, not the least of which is I've never seen a Mac that has run faster than its Wintel counterpart, despite the Macs' faster chip architecture.

So... you've never been to my house then!?

--

We better pass along this breaking news to PCWorld:
" The fastest Windows Vista notebook we've tested this year is a Mac. "

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna 

It does seem to kernel-panic more than Tiger, though, mostly in Safari.

Kernel panic just from using Safari? I think you may have bad RAM.

[lpkmckenna]

Really? I'll do a test...

[Cadaver]

I have three machines with Leopard - 2.66GHz Mac Pro, 2.16GHz MacBook Pro (core duo) and a 1.33GHz 12" PowerBook G4. Not a single kernel panic. Not a single Safari or Mail crash. No beachballed Finder. Leopard isn't perfect, but I've not seen any instability.

I also have a Gigabit Ethernet PowerMac G4 (w/ 1.4GHz 7447B processor upgrade) with Leopard installed which was unstable due to a faulty Radeon 8500 (turns out the fan seized up and wasn't spinning; the chip was overheating and crashing the machine). Running perfectly stable now with a (flashed) Radeon 9800 Pro.

For what its worth, the Mac Pro and the MBP were both Archive & Installs. The 12" PowerBook G4 and PowerMac G4 were both complete "nuc it from orbit and install."

[Dark Goob]

It's OK but I've noticed a lot of bugs.

10.5 bugs

• System would not let me delete some files, saying that they were "in use" even though they aren't really in use. It still said this after I restarted and ejected all volumes; they were files that had failed to copy from a memory card reader for some reason.

• An image selected in Desktop & Screen Saver for Desktop image, does not appear on desktop lots of times.

• An icon that is copied in get info dialog, does not paste into another file's icon the first try. You have to do it twice. The clipboard does not seem to retain the copied icon that first time, and you have to select and copy it again.

• I got an error message while running Digital Performer 5, which i've never seen before: "The application CoreMIDIServer quit unexpectedly." This so-called application shows up as a generic icon in the command-tab switching list view, but I never saw that before in Tiger. And why would it quit?

• There were several disk images that would not eject.

• There is a weird draw bug in the Photoshop CS3 crop tool toolbar interface text field, where you can't see what you're typing.

• "Spaces" switches to the space that one particular app is in, but with the web you usually want several browser windows in one space, several in another, yet it makes ONE of the spaces the home of the browser and auto switches to it. Highly annoying! Or if you make a new Finder window, it switches to the space with your other Finder windows, rather than make it in the space you're in currently! Argh! (I simply don't use Spaces, since it's so poorly implemented and not customizable at all in how it behaves.)

• When you eject a disk by clicking the eject button next to its icon in the "Devices" pop-down in the Finder window sidebar, the whole Finder window closes... ARGH!

• The application installer for the Digital Performer 5.13 upgrade opened a PDF file in preview. I closed the file. I was still in preview, clicked an item in a Finder window. It highlighted, but did not switch to Finder. Preview was still the active program. Could not repeat the behavior.

• In MOTU Audio Installer, weird graphics glitches.

• The same desktop background and same Finder desktop appears in each space; not true virtual desktops. You can't, say, set a space to NOT show your Finder desktop items. Of course if you have an external monitor, they don't show up there. I find this behavior to be inconsistent.

• There is no easy or apparent way to deactivate spotlight indexing! ARGH! Or to deactivate Spotlight all together; I use Launchbar and I find Spotlight just is annoying.

• There is no way to make Expose's "show all" affect all Spaces unless you're already showing all Spaces.

• There is no Coverflow or Quicklook in the open/save dialogs! ARGH!

[Cadaver]

Originally Posted by Dark Goob 

• There is a weird draw bug in the Photoshop CS3 crop tool toolbar interface text field, where you can't see what you're typing.

This one is Adobe's fault. Even CS3 isn't fully Leopard-compliant.

• When you eject a disk by clicking the eject button next to its icon in the "Devices" pop-down in the Finder window sidebar, the whole Finder window closes... ARGH!

I presume this is a "feature" since it only happens if you eject the disk who's window you're in. Eject a disk from the Finder window of another volume, and the window stays put.

• There is no way to make Expose's "show all" affect all Spaces unless you're already showing all Spaces.

I presume this is by design as well.

I have another (minor) bug. After a fresh reboot/login, the first time you open a folder or volume from the desktop, the window appears to open twice (two zoom-out effects) and the window that does open isn't sized properly. Close it and reopen the folder or volume, and it opens correctly. Only happens for the first folder or volume you open from the desktop after a fresh boot. Occurs on multiple machines of mine after both Archive & Install and clean Erase & Install.

[Dark Goob]

Oh yeah also. My general gripes about 10.5:

• They still have not made the graphics card drivers have their own control panel like they do in Vista. So you can't force anti-aliasing to be on.

• There is no way to put a widget on the desktop; you have to use Dashboard which takes forveverrr to load even on my top-of-the-line computer.

• The new all-blue folder icons are ugly as hell and you can't see what they are supposed to be.

• The so-called "unified" appearance is also ugly as hell. I liked the brushed metal better. There is no variety in the interface's appearance like in Tiger. I liked the fact that in Tiger, some things were brushed metal, somethings were the more plain look. I am not a fan of making everything look exactly the same.

• The currently highlighted window is shaded darker than the other windows. But this makes no sense. It would make sense that the highlighted window would be -- highlighted. Like, lighter. Not darker!

• The text on safari bookmark bar has wierd white embossing that's dog ugly.

[Dark Goob]

Originally Posted by Cadaver 

This one is Adobe's fault. Even CS3 isn't fully Leopard-compliant.

Yep. Why should Leopard break text entry fields though?

I presume this is a "feature" since it only happens if you eject the disk who's window you're in. Eject a disk from the Finder window of another volume, and the window stays put.

Bad design is bad design. Inconsistent user interfaces are bad. The window should only close if the user clicks the button to close the window. That's how it behaved in Tiger.

I presume this is by design as well.

Well, Apple seems to have the belief that however they come up with to design things these days is best. Well, it's not. I've always felt that they should have given the option to revert back to the previous user interface if that's what you prefer, much like Microsoft has done with Vista (you can make it look and feel like XP if you prefer). Whereas Apple just forces it down your throat even if there's no good reason for it. Or if their designers thought it was better somehow.

I have another (minor) bug. After a fresh reboot/login, the first time you open a folder or volume from the desktop, the window appears to open twice (two zoom-out effects) and the window that does open isn't sized properly. Close it and reopen the folder or volume, and it opens correctly. Only happens for the first folder or volume you open from the desktop after a fresh boot. Occurs on multiple machines of mine after both Archive & Install and clean Erase & Install.

Another one that I noticed was that Coverflow is very laggy. I mean i have a MacBook Pro 2.4GHZ with a 7200RPM internal drive but I still have to wait a second or two for images to load in the coverflow view of a folder full of JPGs. Also the maximum icon size in list view is very small. And not that big in icon view compared to Vista. So I just find that these features are poorly implemented... Coverflow should render ALL the images in the folder when you open it, so at least if there was a delay, then once it was done rendering it then it could cache that render somewhere and when you open the folder again or once its cached, then you could flip thru the whole thing and it would be useful and fast. Not frustrating.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Dark Goob 

Bad design is bad design. Inconsistent user interfaces are bad.

Huh? Is there some other situation in Leopard where you eject a volume and the window doesn't close with which it is inconsistent?

Originally Posted by Dark Goob 

Well, Apple seems to have the belief that however they come up with to design things these days is best. Well, it's not. I've always felt that they should have given the option to revert back to the previous user interface if that's what you prefer, much like Microsoft has done with Vista (you can make it look and feel like XP if you prefer).

Facts: Apple is not Microsoft. Apple's software is not about infinite configurability. Apple avoids bloat. Hoping for these things not to be true will only lead to frustration. Sometimes I don't like their decisions either, but it's that commitment to strong design that makes their stuff worth using over Microsoft in the first place.

[nickclarson]

Originally Posted by ZakAdelman 

peeb,
Please don't start off with...
"I don't want to start a holy war here, but what is the deal with you Mac fanatics?"
You are asking for a fight and it is not appropriate. Also unless the 8600/300 is running 10.5 (which it can't) this is not the thread to ask this. That said we need a lot more information to even attempt to answer your questions.

Which version of mac?
What are it's minimum requirements?
Which apps are you running?
do they meet the system requirements? (OS, Ram, etc...)

How much ram on the WinNT PC?
What is it's minimum requirements? I am not seeing them anywhere.
Which programs are you running?
do they meet the system requirements? (OS, Ram, Etc...)

From your description you are out of ram. Lets say you have the same OS, you like windows NT so we will compare that. NT4 32mb RAM and NT4 64mb RAM, the latter will run faster, copy faster, have less crashes due to hang ups. Lets assume NT has a minimum of 32mb ram, and you have 64 like you do on the mac. that leaves 32mb of ram for apps when the OS is under load(copying, starting programs, etc...). Your Mac may have a minimum of 64mb which means there is almost nothing left over when it is under heavy load.
the latest BBEdit system requirements...
* Mac OS X 10.4 or later
* Universal Binary (for PowerPC and Intel processors)
* Automator support requires Mac OS X 10.4 or later
you do not meet the requirements for 10.4.x...
* G3, G4, or G5 processor
* Built-in FireWire
* At least 256 MB of RAM
* DVD drive (DVD-ROM), Combo (CD-RW/DVD-ROM) or SuperDrive (DVD-R) for installation
* At least 3 GB of free disk space; 4 GB if you install the XCode 2 Developer Tools.
how can you expect it to keep up, I am assuming you are using an older version of BBEdit so look up it's minimums. You likely don't or barely meet them.

If you are stressing your OS and specifically your ram then you can't compare the 2 computers. Going any further is pointless until you answer the questions above. The highest OS version your ram will allow is 10.0.x.(march 4th 2001) Anything previous is OS9 and there is no comparison to many changes have been made.

If you want "cheap" go for it I prefer the stability I have with my mac. I know other people have different experiences but mine has been great. You are exceeding the available ram, Expect problems, when out of ram the computer will slow down and likely cause a kernel panic.

Thanks for saving me the time it would have taken to make the exact same post

[analogika]

Thanks for letting us know you fell for the same post he did.

[ZakAdelman]

Originally Posted by Dark Goob 

Bad design is bad design. Inconsistent user interfaces are bad. The window should only close if the user clicks the button to close the window. That's how it behaved in Tiger.

If you like how it worked ok but for "consistency" I don't follow. When you tell a DMG or external disk to go away it should do just that. I always found it odd that finder would kick me to my disk list if I was done with it and told it to go away why do I want to be there? That had to be the most pointless place to go, I mean to go to my home folder i had to click through 3 folders Macintosh(takes to root folder) then /Users/[HomeFolder] to get there any way. I was better off closing it and clicking a new finder window any way. And usually did.

As far as adobe I can understand the frustration but Adobe products have always been bad ports of windows products and never really fit into OSX.

[The Placid Casual]

Wow, didn't expect to see so many replies... a lot of them echoing my personal gripes! (User interface consistency is a person fav... just why oh why does the iTunes application window go *lighter* when partially hidden behind another window!!!!).

Thanks everyone, glad it wasn't just me that didn't 'see the light' on this release.

TPC

[Richard Richard]

tbh i think leopard was rushed out as a knee jerk reaction to vista

tiger was much more user friendly and better designed than this - thing

spotlight alone is a total disaster and needs a serious looking at by the apple bods

[zerock]

the issues i been having are that some stuff just dont show in spotlight even though i know they are there.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by Richard Richard 

tbh i think leopard was rushed out as a knee jerk reaction to vista

tiger was much more user friendly and better designed than this - thing

spotlight alone is a total disaster and needs a serious looking at by the apple bods

I actually use it a lot more than I did under Tiger, so it can't be a "total disaster".

It has its issues, though.

[Jens Peter]

No, it's not just you.

On my powerbook, spotlight is painfully slow, I think the 'new' GUI it way to boring and the only new thing I really use, is when using exposé and pressing down 'alt' shows the labels of the open windows.
Actually, I'm very close to installing tiger again.. it just felt more smooth.

[lpkmckenna]

I hated the Tiger Spotlight window. I'm so glad the Leopard Spotlight window is a real Finder window. I especially love the way it auto-loads your last 10,000 documents.

[FloridaMacGuy]

I have installed it on two machines. Both G4's One was a new install on a new HD. The second was an overwrite on 10.4 but it was a low used system. My officemate installed 10.5 on his G5 tower and has had nothing but problems. It even somehow did not allow his main admin account root level access. He was on the phone with Apple tech support for hours.

I have the same crop tool problem in CS2. Its very annoying. I had to get a plugin update from Adobe for Leopard.

As far as the Mac windows debate, most of it is mute as windows has almost caught up to Mac as far as productivity ROI. You will find many white papers were written by huge corporations from all sectors. Disney, Nasa, etc. In that figuring total cost of compared to Return Of Investment. The hardware, the software, the ease of use and amount of work completed. The ROI of the Apple machine was nearly double that of a wintel box.

So you may save $500 up front at the store with a windows box but over a years time with troubleshooting and learning curve taken into account along with the amount of productivity a company saves, makes more, thousands per year with Apple. End of debate.

[nickclarson]

Originally Posted by analogika 

Thanks for letting us know you fell for the same post he did.

haha i'm glad you enjoyed hearing how I feel

Maybe one of the main reasons I haven't had any problems with it is because I don't ever use spotlight... I have most of my stuff well organized and set up so I never need to search for anything. I also find it much easier to just go into the applications folder to launch an application rather than using spotlight.