Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

ghporter · Sep 5, 2009, 10:15 AM

Compared to the Leopard roll-out a while back, there seem to be relatively few "OMG!!!!" moments reported with SL. No major "why the bleep did they do this!?" or "how can I get back this functionality that I depend on for my very breath" trainwreck threads here or that I can find elsewhere, no "how soon do we sue?" news stories, etc. Yes, some quibbles and even a few real glitches have been reported and thoroughly discussed, but I haven't seen any real show-stoppers yet.

So am I safe to start updating my three Macs yet? One, a Rev A MBP IS mission critical, but not until Tuesday, so I have time to restore a backup if I need to.

Chuckit · Sep 5, 2009, 11:52 AM

Works better in every respect for me. Except the file-size thing. That still annoys the crap out of me.

Simon · Sep 5, 2009, 11:55 AM

I get the same impression. People are reporting a lot less surprises with SL than with Leopard.

I think you're probably safe. If I were you I'd check printer drivers first though. It appears although many drivers are already available, some are not there yet. But apart from driver support it seems SL is a pretty solid deal.

OreoCookie · Sep 5, 2009, 12:05 PM

I have had no problems whatsoever, the only app that broke was GPG Mail. The rest runs just fine, although you will have to download a few updates -- not because the old versions stop working, but because software vendors put updates online.

mduell · Sep 5, 2009, 12:19 PM

What's the motivation? Is there some shiny new API you want to use?

I upgraded early, got bit with a bunch of app incompatibility (all but one now resolved), and wonder "why bother?"

Mail and iCal are still retarded as ever, no noticeable performance bump in any apps or systemwide (whereforartthou GCD?), etc.

EndlessMac · Sep 5, 2009, 01:16 PM

Originally Posted by ghporter

So am I safe to start updating my three Macs yet?

If you have 3 Macs you might as well start with the one that is not as important to you. Use SL for a week or so and see if there are any problems then you can think about updating your other Macs.

OreoCookie · Sep 5, 2009, 01:28 PM

I find things to be a bit smoother. Most are just `felt,' so I can't give you any details, but Time Machine backups have become noticeably faster. And I like that the Finder now tells you which app is accessing files on a mounted disk, for instance.

The discussion to me whether or not to make this upgrade is akin to whether or not to make a point upgrade: why not?

ghporter · Sep 6, 2009, 09:57 AM

Well I have Monday off, so I'll give it a shot on my iMac and see how things go. This is also a time I'm planning to install Office '08, so I'll just do SL first and then Office.

richwig83 · Sep 6, 2009, 10:23 AM

My Spotlight is in Japanese!! Argh

Big Mac · Sep 6, 2009, 11:16 AM

it's a bug that someone else already reported.

ajprice · Sep 6, 2009, 11:18 AM

I haven't got SL (yet), I heard about problems with Adobe CS3, has anyone got trouble with that or know what the problem is?

-Q- · Sep 6, 2009, 11:34 AM

So far, no major issues. I think the most 'serious' problem I've encountered has been that Handbrake no longer works reliably. Some of the videos I've had to convert have lost the audio track completely and I can't figure out why.

But the system as a whole as worked well. No issues with printers (mine are both from the past 3 years so relatively new) or any of the applications I use. It has been a pretty solid update.

zerostar · Sep 6, 2009, 12:33 PM

I'd say a resounding YES for most people. The only "maybe" is if some software you rely on is not compatible...

At work we do heavy image and video editing, with many SMB/APF shares as well as fibre channel connections... ALL GOOD on 10.6 ;-)

I have noticed everything seems faster overall. Once Apps are ported properly I think apps will be clearly faster as well, since the Apple ones clearly are. Time machine is MUCH faster (we backup over AFP to a 10.5 Server...

Final Cut, Avid, Photoshop, Fireworks, Dreamweaver no major bugs, some lil GUI glitches in one or two, but all running smooth and stable for me.

patrix · Sep 6, 2009, 11:27 PM

Originally Posted by mduell

(whereforartthou GCD?), etc.

GCD is there. Just waiting for apps to use it, now... With the improvements I see in the Finder's speed, reliability, responsiveness are any indication, GCD will make a HUGE difference.

I'm on a first-gen Macbook, and my Finder feels faster in SL than the Leo finder does on a recent Unibody MB...

Simon · Sep 7, 2009, 03:50 AM

Macintosh Performance Guide: Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard — Performance

Originally Posted by Lloyd Chambers

Conclusions
Snow Leopard booted into the 32-bit kernel is always faster than Leopard, with fair to substantial gains, depending on the application.
But Snow Leopard booted into the 64-bit kernel shows a consistent performance advantage over Leopard, and even more advantage over 32-bit Snow Leopard as well. Performance gains of up to 30% were observed, making Snow Leopard by far the best value for the money in a long, long time. At about $25, you won’t find a more compelling upgrade of any kind, anywhere.

CharlesS · Sep 7, 2009, 04:00 AM

Snow Leopard works better than Leopard did. So if you think Leopard is "ready for prime time", then you'll probably be pleasantly surprised with Snow Leopard.

The only really major problem it has is its installer. But once you get the OS on your drive, you don't have to deal with the installer anymore, so...

Big Mac · Sep 7, 2009, 04:04 AM

What are your main objections to the installer?

Spheric Harlot · Sep 7, 2009, 04:08 AM

There's a couple of issues with keychain syncing over MobileMe and at least one QuickTime-related freak-out that messed up app switching and QuickLook and required a restart.

My Canon printer no longer supports duplex.

Sound output settings appear unreliable for a bunch of people.

I'd wait until 10.6.1, but there's nothing show-stopper in there as it is right now.

CharlesS · Sep 7, 2009, 04:14 AM

Originally Posted by Big Mac

What are your main objections to the installer?

Well, besides the whole archive-and-install thing, there seems to be a bug that occasionally makes the installer decide that OS X can't boot from your hard disk, even if it's GUID partitioned and Leopard's been working fine on it. I got bit by this, and had to reformat the drive. That was annoying.

OreoCookie · Sep 7, 2009, 04:25 AM

… on the other hand, my HP inkjet at work now has the duplex option where it belongs!

Regarding the installer, I can see Apple's point, but I would still like a better visible option for a clean install.

ghporter · Sep 7, 2009, 07:25 AM

Any really authoritative lists of what apps do and don't work under SL? I hate surprises in this kind of situation. I've reviewed the list linked in the printer drivers thread, but it doesn't list a few things I need, especially the Microsoft Remote Desktop Client. Of course the MS page for this app doesn't say beans about anything but the app itself, so I'm left wondering. And I really do NEED this app.

OreoCookie · Sep 7, 2009, 07:33 AM

Yes, several. One is kept by Apple.
But generally, only very, very, very few won't work. It's by no means worse than updating from Tiger to Leopard.

Simon · Sep 7, 2009, 07:33 AM

Originally Posted by ghporter

Any really authoritative lists of what apps do and don't work under SL? I hate surprises in this kind of situation. I've reviewed the list linked in the printer drivers thread, but it doesn't list a few things I need, especially the Microsoft Remote Desktop Client. Of course the MS page for this app doesn't say beans about anything but the app itself, so I'm left wondering. And I really do NEED this app.

Glenn, you should check this SL app compatibility list.

MS Remote Desktop v2.01 is listed as SL compatible.

bearcatrp · Sep 7, 2009, 08:26 AM

Snow leopard may be the big upgrade to true 64 bit but like anything new, it has its problems. I don't think its ready for prime time just yet. I yanked mine off the mac pro and stuck it on a external until the next few updates come out. Until apps are tweaked or rewritten to take full advantage of the new OS, I'll keep whats working now with leopard. Not worth the headache at this time. But if its working for you, no reason not to run it.

Inspector2211 · Sep 7, 2009, 11:00 PM

If you have to try it, definitely do a fresh backup on Time Machine. Perhaps even disconnect that Time Machine drive so Snow Leopard can't screw it up after the install. Then if 10.6 blows up, just hit system restore on the 10.6 disc.

Honestly stick with 10.5.8 if you got work to do tomorrow morning.

CharlesS · Sep 7, 2009, 11:39 PM

To the last two posters: What problems have you been having? It's all been pretty smooth for me. The only issue I've experienced post-installation has been that iChat sometimes shows "Away" as the status when it should be "Available", but that's about as minor as it gets.

Chuckit · Sep 8, 2009, 12:03 AM

Any place I notice a difference, it's for the better.

CharlesS · Sep 8, 2009, 12:32 AM

Indeed. On my machine, it seems to have fixed the NVidia-related UI lockups (or at least, I haven't had one yet since installing SL). That all by itself would offset at least a hundred other bugs. But all I've found so far has been an iChat status bug that'll surely be fixed by 10.6.1 anyway.

Inspector2211 · Sep 8, 2009, 02:27 AM

Originally Posted by CharlesS

To the last two posters: What problems have you been having? It's all been pretty smooth for me. The only issue I've experienced post-installation has been that iChat sometimes shows "Away" as the status when it should be "Available", but that's about as minor as it gets.

Either as an upgrade or clean install, Snow Leopard kept crashing save dialog boxes on CS4, not to mention a few system menus, Quicktime X, and MS Office 2004 never opened with Rosetta installed. Disaster!!!

Firefox did work, but that doesn't help me out much if the other apps aren't working.

So my Mac Pro is back to 10.5.8 and everything is functioning as it should. I am going to get a larger drive for Time Machine, so I'll be moving my installations around, and add a copy of 64 bit Windows to an older drive. When all that happens I'll give Snow Leopard and its updates a second try without anything installed at all for my Mac installation.

Spheric Harlot · Sep 8, 2009, 02:36 AM

Office 2004 works just fine here. I suspect your issues may have a different cause.

In fact, they sound suspiciously like a defective RAM stick. As to why you didn't notice it before: RAM failures are bizarre voodoo and work in wondrous ways - including corrupting any and all installs performed since they failed.

I wouldn't rule it out.

Simon · Sep 8, 2009, 03:31 AM

Originally Posted by Inspector2211

Perhaps even disconnect that Time Machine drive so Snow Leopard can't screw it up after the install.

I don't see why you'd give such advice.

SL won't just "screw up" a TM backup. Why should it? It surely doesn't change the format TM uses or introduce any other kind of backward incompatibility.

In fact, if you use MA to restore from a TM backup, you can chose which version of the TM backup (date and time) to restore from. So you could backup to whatever Leopard install you chose even if you have TM backup your SL install.

I think people should let TM run as usual. If SL works for them they'll retain a backup with version history. If not, they can always restore to a pre-SL system and continue to backup with TM as if the SL update never happened.

CharlesS · Sep 8, 2009, 06:22 AM

Originally Posted by Simon

I don't see why you'd give such advice.

SL won't just "screw up" a TM backup. Why should it? It surely doesn't change the format TM uses or introduce any other kind of backward incompatibility.

Well, if one was doing an Erase and Install and was particularly clumsy, I suppose he/she could accidentally reformat the TM drive while intending to erase the primary drive.

Simon · Sep 8, 2009, 06:27 AM

Sure, but he was talking about the OS. A user can destroy pretty much anything through careless action. The OS on the other hand shouldn't do anything to the TM backup from what I can tell.

OreoCookie · Sep 8, 2009, 07:21 AM

Originally Posted by CharlesS

Well, if one was doing an Erase and Install and was particularly clumsy, I suppose he/she could accidentally reformat the TM drive while intending to erase the primary drive.

But that's not Snow Leopard's fault, if you did that with any previous version of OS X, you'd have lost your Time Machine backups. That's a user error and not software error.

Inspector2211 · Sep 8, 2009, 03:39 PM

Originally Posted by Simon

I don't see why you'd give such advice.

SL won't just "screw up" a TM backup. Why should it? It surely doesn't change the format TM uses or introduce any other kind of backward incompatibility.

In fact, if you use MA to restore from a TM backup, you can chose which version of the TM backup (date and time) to restore from. So you could backup to whatever Leopard install you chose even if you have TM backup your SL install.

I think people should let TM run as usual. If SL works for them they'll retain a backup with version history. If not, they can always restore to a pre-SL system and continue to backup with TM as if the SL update never happened.

Upon the first start of the new system, that's bad advice. Especially since I've read other error reports regarding Time Machine on OS X 10.6 and the loss of data. I'd disconnect that time machine drive, and give the OS a once over. If everything seems in proper working order, then of course reconnect it.

Originally Posted by CharlesS

Well, if one was doing an Erase and Install and was particularly clumsy, I suppose he/she could accidentally reformat the TM drive while intending to erase the primary drive.

Another reason to disconnect it and if you have a Boot Camp drive too.

Originally Posted by Simon

Sure, but he was talking about the OS. A user can destroy pretty much anything through careless action. The OS on the other hand shouldn't do anything to the TM backup from what I can tell.

Once again, go read the reports on Mac Rumors, Apple Discussions, etc. There are errors ocurring with Time Machine on different machines.

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

But that's not Snow Leopard's fault, if you did that with any previous version of OS X, you'd have lost your Time Machine backups. That's a user error and not software error.

Given that OS X Leopard works properly. OS X Snow Leopard does not.

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot

Office 2004 works just fine here. I suspect your issues may have a different cause.

In fact, they sound suspiciously like a defective RAM stick. As to why you didn't notice it before: RAM failures are bizarre voodoo and work in wondrous ways - including corrupting any and all installs performed since they failed.

I wouldn't rule it out.

Tested twice with AHT or Tech Tool Deluxe. The memory checks out. This is entirely on Snow Leopard's side.

Simon · Sep 8, 2009, 03:49 PM

Originally Posted by Inspector2211

Especially since I've read other error reports regarding Time Machine on OS X 10.6 and the loss of data.

Loss of data? Links please.

CharlesS · Sep 8, 2009, 05:14 PM

Originally Posted by Inspector2211

Given that OS X Leopard works properly. OS X Snow Leopard does not.

Veltliner · Sep 9, 2009, 01:22 AM

Originally Posted by richwig83

My Spotlight is in Japanese!! Argh

Looks like your Mac wants to teach you something

OreoCookie · Sep 9, 2009, 05:24 AM

Originally Posted by Inspector2211

Upon the first start of the new system, that's bad advice. Especially since I've read other error reports regarding Time Machine on OS X 10.6 and the loss of data. I'd disconnect that time machine drive, and give the OS a once over. If everything seems in proper working order, then of course reconnect it.

It's not bad advice.

Originally Posted by Inspector2211

Once again, go read the reports on Mac Rumors, Apple Discussions, etc. There are errors ocurring with Time Machine on different machines.

I have only read of errors that concern new backups, but not old ones.

Originally Posted by Inspector2211

Given that OS X Leopard works properly. OS X Snow Leopard does not.

Are you sure you've taken my post into context, given the post I was replying to?

Originally Posted by Inspector2211

The memory checks out. This is entirely on Snow Leopard's side.

You seem to be rather sure of that. Some memory faults do not occur every time you test. If you want to be sure, download and compile memtest and let it run for 24 hours.

richwig83 · Sep 9, 2009, 05:35 AM

Originally Posted by Veltliner

Looks like your Mac wants to teach you something

Eden Aurora · Sep 9, 2009, 07:26 AM

reading this thread, it seems nobody should install snow leopard as it buggy for a majority of the people here.

TWO BIG QUESTIONS
when is 10.6.1 coming out?
when is adobe updating their software?

Wiskedjak · Sep 9, 2009, 08:34 AM

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

The discussion to me whether or not to make this upgrade is akin to whether or not to make a point upgrade: why not?

Which leads me to this question:
Is Snow Leopard the beginning of Apple charging for smaller point upgrades?

Simon · Sep 9, 2009, 08:59 AM

Originally Posted by Eden Aurora

reading this thread, it seems nobody should install snow leopard as it buggy for a majority of the people here.

I think it's safe to say that SL has been a lot less buggy for most people than 10.5.0 was. Most people have actually encountered only very few bugs with SL itself.

App and driver compatibility is another issue though. There's a list of compatible apps here.

when is 10.6.1 coming out?

Nobody knows. Apple has just started seeding 10.6.1 builds to developers.

when is adobe updating their software?

They already have. It's called CS4. I wouldn't count on Adobe updating CS3 for SL though.

Simon · 09:16 AM

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak

Which leads me to this question:
Is Snow Leopard the beginning of Apple charging for smaller point upgrades?

Probably not. John Siracusa compared the OS X update scheme to Intel's tick-tock strategy. If you see SL as the refinement update and 10.7 as the update that brings radical new features and so on it makes sense for Apple to offer the former at a reduced upgrade price and the latter at full price.

I originally didn't believe Apple would offer SL at a discount just because it's a "minor" update to the major Leopard update. But that's exactly what Apple did. Siracusa expects 10.7 to be a more substantial update. If that's the case I also expect Apple to again charge the regular $129.

I don't expect to see Apple charge money for the regular 10.6.x updates which I see more as bug fixes rather than feature updates or OS improvements.

Inspector2211 · Sep 9, 2009, 01:44 PM

Originally Posted by Simon

Loss of data? Links please.

Google?

Originally Posted by CharlesS

Originally Posted by Eden Aurora

reading this thread, it seems nobody should install snow leopard as it buggy for a majority of the people here.

TWO BIG QUESTIONS
when is 10.6.1 coming out?
when is adobe updating their software?

I'm wondering as well. Otherwise I spent $29 just to use Firefox on 10.6. Nothing else works.

Originally Posted by Simon

I think it's safe to say that SL has been a lot less buggy for most people than 10.5.0 was. Most people have actually encountered only very few bugs with SL itself.

Are you working as information minister for Saddam Hussein? Your claim on unbuggyness reminds me of that information minister saying there's no problems in Baghdad during the first gulf war.

I'd encourage you all to read some of the reviews at Amazon by people who purchased 10.6, and have encountered problems. No fanboyism, just simple reviews whether it worked or not. 26 1 star ratings so far, and that's something I haven't seen in an Apple OS release for a long time.

Chuckit · Sep 9, 2009, 01:45 PM

Originally Posted by Eden Aurora

reading this thread, it seems nobody should install snow leopard as it buggy for a majority of the people here.

TWO BIG QUESTIONS
when is 10.6.1 coming out?
when is adobe updating their software?

A majority of the people here? If my quick skim-count is right, there are eight people who said it was better than Leopard, one who said it was pretty much the same, and two who said it was worse (one of whom is believed to have defective hardware).

mduell · Sep 9, 2009, 02:14 PM

Spotlight stopped working today for no apparent reason.

Spheric Harlot · Sep 9, 2009, 02:21 PM

Originally Posted by Inspector2211

Are you working as information minister for Saddam Hussein? Your claim on unbuggyness reminds me of that information minister saying there's no problems in Baghdad during the first gulf war.

I'd encourage you all to read some of the reviews at Amazon by people who purchased 10.6, and have encountered problems. No fanboyism, just simple reviews whether it worked or not. 26 1 star ratings so far, and that's something I haven't seen in an Apple OS release for a long time.

Just skimming those, the first 6 out of 7 one-star reviews are because of missing PRINTER DRIVERS.

Oh wow.

Blame Apple for releasing the thing one month ahead of schedule, and printer manufacturers failing to catch up on their support?

Hooray.

One of the guys has a problem with Airport connectivity which may be Leopard-related.

And one guy sounds like you - Gregg Eckhardt. However, he also claims that the user forums are "filled with horror stories", and that, frankly, is a flat-out lie, especially compared with all previous major upgrades..

Inspector2211 · Sep 9, 2009, 03:02 PM

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot

Just skimming those, the first 6 out of 7 one-star reviews are because of missing PRINTER DRIVERS.

Oh wow.

Blame Apple for releasing the thing one month ahead of schedule, and printer manufacturers failing to catch up on their support?

Hooray.

One of the guys has a problem with Airport connectivity which may be Leopard-related.

And one guy sounds like you - Gregg Eckhardt. However, he also claims that the user forums are "filled with horror stories", and that, frankly, is a flat-out lie, especially compared with all previous major upgrades..

That review you pointed out shows that Apple rushed this out before it was really ready. Apple does have an obligation to work with the third party developers to make sure that major printers, scanners, etc. do work…rushing the OS out doesn't accomplish that. Otherwise the OS is a useless piece of junk. I do admire your attempts to blame the users, when it's not really their fault.

Spheric Harlot · Sep 9, 2009, 03:21 PM

Actually, no: third party manufacturers have an obligation towards their customers to make their **** work.

None of this is Apple's problem. They don't build the printers; they don't write the drivers. They simply supply the manufacturers with preliminary betas of the new system well six months in advance of release.

My audio interface's manufacturer had flawlessly working 64-bit Snow Leopard compatible drivers ready for download the night before 10.6 was released.

The manufacturer of my former MIDI interface took over three months after the release of 10.5 to support that system. I threw it out and bought one from a decent manufacturer (i.e. not M-Audio).

If you have trouble with your peripherals, do your ****ing homework before upgrading, or buy better peripherals from manufacturers who have their **** together.

Do you blame the manufacturer if you buy a new car and it doesn't fit in your garage, too? Or do you just clam up and eat in the stupidity of not having done your research beforehand?