I came here expecting to find some criticism, or at least some discussion of Apple's newest version, since it is actually out now.

Are all of you guys completely content with the fixes, speed improvements, and smaller footprint?

From what I can tell, this is the beginning of OS EX, what 10.0 should have been, that harkens back to the never fully appreciated, much loved, long lamented 8.6.

Oh man NeoLuddite if I had an Intel machine I would be all jazzed up about it.

Wish they put out a PowerPC version were they trimmed all the Intel fat out.

Hm, the speed gain is a mixed bag.
Linky

I think i'll try it on my machine some time in the future, but i have no hurry. The saved HD-Space is good, though. Otherwise, i am a little interested in the new finder, but: Duplicating files is slower in 10.6 for example?

The performance gains of 10.6 in that link above are pretty meaningless to me except javascript. Shutdown faster? OK, meaningless for working. Wake-Up time slower? Pffff...
Time-Machine is faster, ok nice. I haven't used TM yet.
iMovie is faster? So what.

hmmm...

I would like to see more Finder-related benchmarks.

Additional Info: The new Quicktime-X Player lacks nearly all features of the old QT-7 Pro Player. You can install QT7 Pro afterwards manually.

I'm in no hurry to buy either. I might break down, but at the moment I'm not happy to pay Stevie 30 bucks for yet another bag full of crystal sausages (from what I've seen and read, Aqua still rules in S.Leopard--STILL no sensible iTunes-scrollbars universally. Still no choice of themes. The scrollbar situation is starting to become surreal.) What a disappointment. Looks to me like S. Leopard should be gratis.

My thoughts on this subject are not necessarily the views of thalo.net nor are they politically correct. But I'll jump on board as soon as they start naming their upgrades after less girly-sounding things. Instead of "Snow Leopard" how about "Barracuda"? I like cats, but isn't it about time for some fish? Aren't they environmentally warm-fuzzy things too? I suggest the names "Shark," "Piranha," and "Orca" along with the aforementioned "Barracuda." Some of the previous upgrades may have deserved the name "Whale," "Puffer Fish," or "Remora," but at least dump the stupid cat names. Grow a pair.

Wow, smithz, those results are underwhelming in the extreme !

Who shuts down a laptop all the time? I just close the lid. Taking longer to wake up and find the network, now that is a deal breaker. It takes too long already.

quote:

Originally posted by BN:
I'll jump on board as soon as they start naming their upgrades after less girly-sounding things. Instead of "Snow Leopard"

But isn't that snow leopard CUTE?

Yeah. Snow leopards are indeed cute, Neo. Suppose I could put an Intel chip in my PowerBook G3 Wallstreet?

I vote for more pornish names or whatever. All those Cats in a row, pfff. It's like a bad dream, it needs to stop. Comparable to all this i-(insertyourwordhere) crap.

10.6.1. Carmella
10.6.2. Little Boy
10.6.3. Tomahawk
10.6.4. Bastardo
10.6.5. Ace of Spades
10.6.6. Resonator

quote:

I vote for more pornish names or whatever.

I defer to the Kraut. Great idea.

10.6.7. Big Betty.

quote:

Originally posted by NeoLuddite:
I came here expecting to find some criticism, or at least some discussion of Apple's newest version, since it is actually out now.

Are all of you guys completely content with the fixes, speed improvements, and smaller footprint?

From what I can tell, this is the beginning of OS EX, what 10.0 should have been, that harkens back to the never fully appreciated, much loved, long lamented 8.6.

Howdy. Been a while. Don't boot OS X any more since the latest OS X "security" (hah ! "security from cupertino" makes me think of ordering a nice schnitzel in a chinese take-away) update decided it would not let me dual-boot the better of the two OS'es installed on my Mini (guess which that is - starts with l, ends with -nux :-) any more. F... You, Apple.

But ! The official, in-depth, long-awaited ars-technica review of the latest Cupertinian creation is out. 23 pages of - well, anyway page 22 contains the only information worth reading: OS X continues to limp and stumble along with a filesystem from the 80's. Quote:

"Practically speaking, think about those times when you run Disk Utility on an HFS+ volume and it finds (and hopefully repairs) a bunch of errors. That's bad, okay? That's something that should not happen with a modern, thoroughly checksummed, always-consistent-on-disk file system unless there are hardware problems (and a ZFS storage pool can actually deal with that as well). And yet it happens all the time with HFS+ disks in Mac OS X when various bits of metadata to get corrupted or become out of date"

No, these things shouldn't happen my friends, but they do, oh wonder of wonders, when 8-core-gigahertz-sucking petaflop processors in computers with gigabytes of RAM and terabytes of hard disk space run an ultra-modern, shiny operating system that - alas - uses a 20 year old file system for storing and accessing those files that contain your precious data, and some people even pay a lot of money for this kind of ultra-modern technology as long as it is stacked inside a box with a little bitten apple on it. And then, who needs those file-things anyway. Is that where my iTunes-music is, inquiring "mac"-users want to know.

Now back to that other OS where "repair privileges" is a no-no since there is no need to.

Cheerio, old buggers !

This message has been edited. Last edited by: klapauzius,

Which filesystem do you use on your linux box? There are plenty...

Brother Klappy welcome back.

You are as incoherent now as you were back when.

Hope things have been well for you.

quote:

Originally posted by smithz:
Which filesystem do you use on your linux box? There are plenty...

Ubuntu comes with ext3 as standard. Good enough for me

quote:

Originally posted by BN:
Yeah. Snow leopards are indeed cute, Neo. Suppose I could put an Intel chip in my PowerBook G3 Wallstreet?

That would sort of defeat the purpose of your superior "RISC" processor, wouldn't it?

Neo, I don't know which types of processor are superior. But it could be the old 6502. I think that if we found a way to hook about 148,000 of them or so in parallel, you'd have quite a machine.

The good old times. What my trusty C-64 could do with a 0.9Mhz 6510 CPU, fascinating.

Oh, crap. I'm going to have to buy an old trusty C-64 from eBay one of these days. I had a Vic-20 which was sort of like the C-64 Jr. Great machines. We forget just how powerful those processors were when not asked to carry around a thousand pounds of happy horseshit on their backs. If you code in machine language (or ever a good Turbo Basic or Advan Basic), they can really fly.

We broke down and bought Snow Leopard today.

Installation took only about 45 minutes. As advertized, the Finder seems indeed snappier than Leopard's. Safari is faster.
And incredibly we seem to have gained no less than 17 (seventeen) GB of disk space.

GUI still shamelessly girly. The traffic lights and crystal dildos seem to me more awful-looking than ever--they have a sort of washed-out quality. And the stupid transparent elements are still there of course.

Alright yabors.

Wow that is a lot of freed up space. I think they said around 8GB.

Wish the retards would release a PowerPC version without all the Intel back end.

I still use Seamonkey. I would use Camino but they changed it to be like Safari and Firefox.