Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 4th Dec 2007 10:23 UTC, submitted by Francis Kuntz
Mac OS X "No one is unhappy with Mac OS X Version 10.4, known as Tiger. OS X is not an application platform that needed repair, speeding up, or exterior renovation. Motivations for major upgrades of competing system software - roll-ups of an unmanageable number of fixes, because the calendar says it's time, or because users are perceived to have version fatigue - don't apply to OS X. People buy Macs because the platform as a whole is perfect, full stop. Leopard is a rung above perfection. It's taken as rote that the Mac blows away PC users' expectations. Leopard blows away Mac users' expectations, and that's saying a great deal."
Order by: Score:
PR crap!
by Odisej on Tue 4th Dec 2007 10:37 UTC
Odisej
Member since:
2006-05-11

Uau, here it goes again.. the Apple PR machinery! Now, really. I have some issues with this article. First of all, sound like a detergent commercial. Second of all, nothing is perfect (even Apple). And third - if Mac preachers would really have a good education, they would know this - everything is relative. I would give the perfect 10, if I stick to this rather stupid grading, to Ubuntu, Fedora 8, ... With both, i can do all i want to and wish to. And both are free as in freedom. Both developed by amazing bunch of people who give their spare time to develop something new and useful. Now, how can OS X beat that? Besides, criticism is the engine of progress... not "perfect 10" articles such as this one.

Additional edit: I read the article twice, checking if I understood it incorrectly the first time, trying to find traces of sarcasm, irony. No luck.

Edited 2007-12-04 10:49

Reply Score: 40

RE: PR crap!
by nobody on Tue 4th Dec 2007 11:57 UTC in reply to "PR crap!"
nobody Member since:
2006-06-02

Good comment, but could've done without the accusations of editiorial bias and the ubiquitous calling out of OS Zealotry (though you avoided the Z-word in favour of "preacher"... good on ya).

Now yes, all things are relative, but in order to argue you need some objectivity. You can agree that its an objective fact that a vast majority of users couldn't care less about free beer and community. They just want a tool to get the job done, browse the internet, and sync their iPod.

Now, perhaps is not the OS for the few edge-cases out there, but for the rest an excellent operating system has just been made even better.

"Perfect" is not the word I would've used. "Best" would've been more appropriate! :-)

Reply Score: 1

v RE: PR crap!
by theTSF on Tue 4th Dec 2007 13:48 UTC in reply to "PR crap!"
RE[2]: PR crap!
by vimh on Tue 4th Dec 2007 17:13 UTC in reply to "PR crap!"
vimh Member since:
2006-02-04

First of all, sound like a detergent commercial.

To be honest, I couldn't finish reading it. That you managed to read it twice astounds me.

The largest issue I have from what I read is comparing Leopard to Vista. Having a preference between the two isn't a problem. But to compare the two for the sake of a review is in my opinion pointless. That's a comparison, not a review. If an OS can't stand on its own merits then it's not worth using. When reading a review on Leopard or any other OS, I could care less if the author thinks the other guy sucks.

Reply Score: 3

RE: PR crap!
by sjf4 on Tue 4th Dec 2007 17:25 UTC in reply to "PR crap!"
sjf4 Member since:
2007-09-12

Uau, here it goes again.. the Apple PR machinery! Now, really. I have some issues with this article. First of all, sound like a detergent commercial. Second of all, nothing is perfect (even Apple). And third - if Mac preachers would really have a good education, they would know this - everything is relative. I would give the perfect 10, if I stick to this rather stupid grading, to Ubuntu, Fedora 8, ... With both, i can do all i want to and wish to. ...


I mean because there aren't any reviews out there that say 10.5 is a piece of junk or anything. Perhaps those are even the majority of articles I've seen linked from major tech blogs since 10.5 has been released. I think it's more likely that this guy didn't have any of the problems other users have described and was frustrated with reading 10.5 is a piece of junk articles when it seemed perfectly fine to him.

I can't help but notice you've not even disputed one of his assertions in your post. You've attacked the author personally, but that's about it. That's not really much of a counterargument. I also notice that you decry the author's rating system, then use it yourself to rate two Linux distributions a ten.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: PR crap!
by kaiwai on Tue 4th Dec 2007 17:30 UTC in reply to "RE: PR crap!"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

I mean because there aren't any reviews out there that say 10.5 is a piece of junk or anything. Perhaps those are even the majority of articles I've seen linked from major tech blogs since 10.5 has been released. I think it's more likely that this guy didn't have any of the problems other users have described and was frustrated with reading 10.5 is a piece of junk articles when it seemed perfectly fine to him.


What I also find funny is the number of these 'bad reviews' are written by those who later admit they were running hacks on their machine, they upgraded rather than an archive and install, they failed to uninstall conflicting applications.

I've yet to see a single bad review from a person who did a clean install - I did a clean install when I upgraded from Tiger and haven't experienced a single problem. My wireless works, applications work perfectly, networking is reliable, not a single application crash yet (I have no PowerPC applications btw). Everything on here just works(tm).

I would love to see, however, 10.5.2 to be released by January - fix some more long standing bugs - I'd also like to see Apple address the laundry list of bugs in their AppKit which application developers have to work around. If they reduce those bugs, improve their IDE to surpass Microsofts Visual Studio - they would create a compelling platform to develop applications on.

I am, however, disappointed that the likes of Solidworks haven't pulled their head out of their behind and realise that Mac is on the rise in engineering circles - they could lose their position as the premier must have tool.

Edited 2007-12-04 17:37

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: PR crap!
by StephenBeDoper on Thu 6th Dec 2007 18:57 UTC in reply to "RE: PR crap!"
StephenBeDoper Member since:
2005-07-06

I think it's more likely that this guy didn't have any of the problems other users have described and was frustrated with reading 10.5 is a piece of junk articles when it seemed perfectly fine to him.


If that was his intent, why bother with the pretense of calling it a "review"?" Posting a comment on one of the negative articles that got him in a tizzy would have served the purpose just as well.

I can't help but notice you've not even disputed one of his assertions in your post. You've attacked the author personally, but that's about it.


The criticism may not have been phrased that well, but the original poster's point appears to be simply that the article reads more like marketing copy than an objective review. Even just from the excerpt that was posted here, it's pretty clear that the "reviewer" is bending over backwards to praise Leopard, and there aren't many faster ways to torpedo ones' credibility (regardless of the subject of the review).

Reply Score: 2

Hmmm
by Ultimatebadass on Tue 4th Dec 2007 10:40 UTC
Ultimatebadass
Member since:
2006-01-08

How does a system that runs only on Apple PCs earns 10 in "Compatibility"? That's a bit like saying "you can buy this car in any color you like, as long as it's pink" ;)

Reply Score: 26

RE: Hmmm
by senornoodle on Tue 4th Dec 2007 11:06 UTC in reply to "Hmmm"
senornoodle Member since:
2005-07-12

I would guess he meant compatability with programs from previous OS X versions, but that can't be right or else I wouldn't have had to download all those updates to make things work with Leopard...

Reply Score: 7

RE[2]: Hmmm
by stew on Tue 4th Dec 2007 11:15 UTC in reply to "RE: Hmmm"
stew Member since:
2005-07-06

Removing support for Classic should also deduct points in "compatibility".

Reply Score: 10

RE[3]: Hmmm
by nobody on Tue 4th Dec 2007 11:27 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Hmmm"
nobody Member since:
2006-06-02

Classic has been of no use to anyone for years now. May as well whine about how it has no support for 68K processors while we're at it.

Reply Score: 6

RE[4]: Hmmm
by raver31 on Tue 4th Dec 2007 11:37 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Hmmm"
raver31 Member since:
2005-07-06

What ? It doesn't ?

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Hmmm
by nobody on Tue 4th Dec 2007 11:58 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Hmmm"
nobody Member since:
2006-06-02

It needs a bloody MMU also.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Hmmm
by djame on Tue 4th Dec 2007 14:21 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Hmmm"
djame Member since:
2005-07-08

It's not quite true, a lot of apps in scientific environment has not been updated for ages. I think that even the mac os x version of omnipage run under some sort of hidden classic env...

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: Hmmm
by TomB7 on Tue 4th Dec 2007 15:06 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Hmmm"
TomB7 Member since:
2006-01-03

Is Omnipage even still in business?

have you looked at DEVONThink?

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Hmmm
by rockwell on Tue 4th Dec 2007 15:47 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Hmmm"
rockwell Member since:
2005-09-13

//Classic has been of no use to anyone for years now. //

Attitudes like this explain why Microsoft rules the desktop. Backward-compatibility wins in the long run, despite the issues associated with it.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Hmmm
by TomB7 on Tue 4th Dec 2007 16:13 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Hmmm"
TomB7 Member since:
2006-01-03

"Backward-compatibility wins in the long run"

The way it actually plays out is that quality apps DO get updated to OS X native status. The transition to OS X and phasing out of Classic has been fairly painless to me.

Also, the Mac is very friendly toward NEW apps; the Xcode environment is said to blow away MSFT development tools.

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: Hmmm
by rockwell on Tue 4th Dec 2007 17:04 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Hmmm"
rockwell Member since:
2005-09-13

//The way it actually plays out is that quality apps DO get updated to OS X native status.//

True enough in the Apple world, but most businesses don't run legacy OS 9 apps. Many do have legacy WIN 32 and DOS apps that they must continue to use. The installed base of such apps is likely much higher than an OS 9 scenario. THus, the need for backward compatibility by MS.

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: Hmmm
by TomB7 on Tue 4th Dec 2007 17:30 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Hmmm"
TomB7 Member since:
2006-01-03

"Many do have legacy WIN 32 and DOS apps that they must continue to use. "


It would be interesting to have the Enterprise IT folk who may visit this forum comment. It's hard to imagine Users all across America being forced to run Windows so the CFO can run his 1980 version of Visicalc.

Reply Score: 1

What is compatibility?
by s_groening on Tue 4th Dec 2007 11:34 UTC in reply to "Hmmm"
s_groening Member since:
2005-12-13

How about supporting two completely different arcchitectures (Intel and PPC) equally with only one installer? How about allowing you to run applications compiled for PPC on an Intel box with very few hickups? How about supporting 32-bit and 64-bit processors alike without needing to choose during installation? How about the ability to mix and match a broad range of open source and legacy X11-based applications with Mac OS X applications on the same desktop?

Now, I'm not saying this makes it a '10', but I still believe this has to do with compatibility, thus allowing a high score whether you like Apple and its products or not ...

Reply Score: 10

RE: What is compatibility?
by Ultimatebadass on Tue 4th Dec 2007 11:54 UTC in reply to "What is compatibility?"
Ultimatebadass Member since:
2006-01-08

A high score? Sure, around 7-8, those things you mentioned are all valid points. I wasn't saying it deserves a 1 either, but a "10"? How much did they pay him and who is going to believe that?

Reply Score: 1

RE: What is compatibility?
by presi on Tue 4th Dec 2007 12:17 UTC in reply to "What is compatibility?"
presi Member since:
2006-11-08

How about supporting two completely different arcchitectures (Intel and PPC) equally with only one installer?

Do you think this is a feature? I always thought this was a unnecessary bloated solution.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: What is compatibility?
by evangs on Tue 4th Dec 2007 12:33 UTC in reply to "RE: What is compatibility?"
evangs Member since:
2005-07-07

I used some Pocket PC devices back in 2003, when handhelds used different processors and architectures. It was hell trying to download the correct binary for your processor instruction set.

Being able to use a 'fat' binary across different architectures is bliss. Yes, it adds bloat since you have both PPC, x86 and x86-64 executables stored on disc, but that is nothing since most of your storage is used for media and resources which are platform independent. A fat binary usually adds 1 - 2 MB to the size of a program. It is a problem if you're trying to run it on a toaster, but it isn't an issue on most computers today.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: What is compatibility?
by s_groening on Tue 4th Dec 2007 15:16 UTC in reply to "RE: What is compatibility?"
s_groening Member since:
2005-12-13

"Do you think this is a feature? I always thought this was a unnecessary bloated solution."

I never claimed it to be a feature, merely a compatibility factor, that might be compelling to some which I find worth mentioning.
You might very well argue that it's a bloated solution, but that's not my prime concern when it comes to this particular aspect of Apples compatibility. For the sake of the argument I value 'ease of use' over the thought of it being 'bloat'.

Reply Score: 1

RE: What is compatibility?
by TheMonoTone on Tue 4th Dec 2007 15:49 UTC in reply to "What is compatibility?"
TheMonoTone Member since:
2006-01-01

Uh. Lets take a step back here, and think for a second. If your saying compatibility means to be able to run software on lots of different hardware, which it seems like your trying to say, then OS X would probably be the least compatible out of the major operating systems. I'd probably give it a 1, maybe a 2. If your talking about being able to run apps that were previously available on OS X but older versions then ok, I guess I could see where your coming from. Then again, OS X still isn't the best there either. I can still run some old DOS programs on Vista from the 1980's. Where's your 1980's mac programs running on OS X?

So unless he's just comparing Apple OS X with OS X... which is pointless for the rest of the world, he's completely off base with is review there. Your just trying to justify him which leaves me to believe your a Mac user as well.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Hmmm
by Blikkie on Tue 4th Dec 2007 12:56 UTC in reply to "Hmmm"
Blikkie Member since:
2005-08-16

I'd say that compatibility is mostly about compatibility with peripherals, printers, scanners, cameras and such. When it comes to that it should easily beat Vista. Hardware that was compatible with 10.4 should be compatible with 10.5.

Reply Score: 1

impressive?
by Lion on Tue 4th Dec 2007 10:42 UTC
Lion
Member since:
2007-03-22

If it's so perfect, why were there hacks for the dock, the menu bar, and ways of making stacks work acceptably (or even apps to emulate the tiger way of doing things) within days of it's release?
Sticking with 10.4 for now on my machines.

Reply Score: 8

reader be cautious
by Hurtta on Tue 4th Dec 2007 10:50 UTC
Hurtta
Member since:
2006-04-16

When reading reviews, you should always get a bit worried when revier simply can't find anything wrong with the product. Especially when there are numerous other reviews out there, writers of which are nowhere as content with Leopard as this particular reviewer seems to be.

This review divides into two parts first he want's to tell how beautiful and great and everything Leopard is and on the other hand he seems too eager to bash Microsoft and Vista.

This smells so fishy that i'd like to throw up.

Reply Score: 27

Bad post
by tante on Tue 4th Dec 2007 10:52 UTC
tante
Member since:
2006-04-17

This post was not worth being linked because the review just falsely claims that OSX Leopard was perfect, in spite of the bugs that are common, the holes in the firewall, the changes that keep many people from updating or that lead them to using all kinds of hack to remove them.

Leopard might be good (I don't use proprietary operating systems, I wouldn't know) but it's not perfect and it has many obvious and well-documented flaws.

Linking this was a bad decision by OSNews, makes you look like a Apple PR outlet.

Reply Score: 11

RE: Bad post
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 4th Dec 2007 10:56 UTC in reply to "Bad post"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Linking this was a bad decision by OSNews, makes you look like a Apple PR outlet.


You are free to write your own.

Which I did, coincidentally. The review is done and up on the backend, can be published any moment now. Five pages of Leopard review.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Bad post
by Odisej on Tue 4th Dec 2007 11:08 UTC in reply to "RE: Bad post"
Odisej Member since:
2006-05-11

If I may be so bold as to ask: how did OSN get their hands on Leopard? I thin every review should include information on how the gadget/computer was received and what is the arrangement with the company (will the gadget/computer/OS be returned to the manufacturer after review or not). Naive question, for sure, but one of great importance for judging the reviewers motives. ;)

Edited 2007-12-04 11:12

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Bad post
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 4th Dec 2007 11:11 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Bad post"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

The way we usually get stuff: we buy it, or we get it on a loan basis. It's the latter in this case.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Bad post
by Odisej on Tue 4th Dec 2007 11:15 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Bad post"
Odisej Member since:
2006-05-11

Thank you for your quick reply. I am glad to hear it, btw.

Regards,

Odisej

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Bad post
by tante on Tue 4th Dec 2007 11:24 UTC in reply to "RE: Bad post"
tante Member since:
2006-04-17

I asked Apple for a Review machine but they didn't give me one ;)

Of course it's up to you what you link, I just think that having some sort of standard wouldn't hurt and that linked article is just bad. Not because it's badly written but because it's wrong and not an honest review.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Bad post
by dylansmrjones on Tue 4th Dec 2007 11:05 UTC in reply to "Bad post"
dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

makes you look like a Apple PR outlet.


What makes you think it isn't? ;)

Reply Score: 6

RE[2]: Bad post
by kaiwai on Tue 4th Dec 2007 16:29 UTC in reply to "RE: Bad post"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

What makes you think it isn't? ;)


By virtue of people talking about Mac OS X in this very forum, they're part of the marketing process. Anything that turns Mac OS X into a talking point in a forum/in the real world, is free marketing.

Reply Score: 1

Now I love OS X but come on
by senornoodle on Tue 4th Dec 2007 10:57 UTC
senornoodle
Member since:
2005-07-12

"Leopard is a rung above perfection."

WHAT?!?!?
Did this guy just buy a new iMac after using Windows 3.1 for the last decade? The article almost reads like an elaborate parody of Apple fanboy-ism.

Reply Score: 19

What a piece...
by dylansmrjones on Tue 4th Dec 2007 11:04 UTC
dylansmrjones
Member since:
2005-10-02

...of bullshit.

Complete hyperbole all the way through that crappy article.

How much did they pay him for that piece of ******* PR-crap?

Reply Score: 19

Welcome to the spin machine
by Soulbender on Tue 4th Dec 2007 11:09 UTC
Soulbender
Member since:
2005-08-18

This is just really, really bad journalism. I'd go into details but really, just read it and weep. He makes pretty much every old idea Apple added sound like the second coming of Christ. I'm not saying they aren't good features but really, how excited can you get over virtual desktops?

Reply Score: 13

Funny
by thavith_osn on Tue 4th Dec 2007 11:32 UTC
thavith_osn
Member since:
2005-07-11

Funny how a few days ago there was an article saying how Leopard pissed some guy off and now it gets a perfect 10.

Personally, Leopard for me (please note, for me) is great. I've had a c

Reply Score: 2

I was looking for some sarcasm
by PlatformAgnostic on Tue 4th Dec 2007 12:01 UTC
PlatformAgnostic
Member since:
2006-01-02

This article definitely looked like a troll of some sort. It's just so sugar-coated and over-the-top that I can't believe it's serious. OS X is good, but I'm still waiting for the other shoe to drop...

Reply Score: 2

......
by islander on Tue 4th Dec 2007 12:29 UTC
islander
Member since:
2007-04-11

Started but just couldn't finish reading it.Seems it was rather detailed.Would have if it didn't have the "Thurrot-ish" feel and the webpage not so damn ugly to look at.

Reply Score: 2

If only...
by DevL on Tue 4th Dec 2007 12:39 UTC
DevL
Member since:
2005-07-06

...Zimbra could get their act together and release a version that supports Leopard. It's not as if Apple haven't released developer previews since 2006...

Reply Score: 2

RE: If only...
by unoengborg on Tue 4th Dec 2007 13:12 UTC in reply to "If only..."
unoengborg Member since:
2005-07-06

I havn't tried Zimbra, but isn't Zimbra written in Java? The Java in Leopard is seriously broken, for one thing they didn't ship it with Java 6, and the Java 5 that comes with it, is much more buggy than on previous version of MacOS-X. Perhaps this is the reason for the Zimbra problem.

As a Java developer I'm seriously disappointed with Apple. They seam to have no feeling for continuity in their products and break or discontinue things at their whim. This is not the only example just remember how they discontinued A/UX and replaced it with AIX without any resonable upgrade path and then they dicontinued all unix offerings altogether again with no viable upgrade path for existing server customer (Mac OS-X came much later).

You only have to have visited one of the latest Java One conferences to know that MacOS-X have been a very popular platform for Java developers, now Apple rewards them like this. Yes, Leopard really blows all few remaining my expectatiions of Apple away and out of the window.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: If only...
by Soulbender on Tue 4th Dec 2007 15:27 UTC in reply to "RE: If only..."
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

I think he means the Zimbra connector for OSX.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: If only...
by DevL on Tue 4th Dec 2007 15:57 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: If only..."
DevL Member since:
2005-07-06

No, I mean Zimbra as in the server components. And they don't work under Leopard, Java or no Java.

Reply Score: 2

I like Leopard, but...
by iskios on Tue 4th Dec 2007 12:44 UTC
iskios
Member since:
2005-07-06

I really like Leopard, but to be honest, i would not call it perfect. I simply do not think that some of the changes to the Dock, for example, required the removing of others. Stacks could simply have had a "View as Menu" option for those of us who were happy with that.

I have also never gotten that clip to Dashboard feature to work. Time Machine is not a great backup, other than looking nice, and the changes that made it impossible for me to use Shapeshifter annoy me because it simply tells me that Apple is a little too control freaky for me, trying to force everyone to conform to their particular sense of style.

I will say that on my Mac Mini, Leopard is much faster than Tiger, boots faster, and once I did some fine tuning, displays much better on my display. I also like the newer version of Mail and Safari, though I still prefer Firefox, and I no longer have the same issues connecting to Windows servers that I once did.

Leopard is good, but neither perfect nor ground breaking in any way.

Reply Score: 2

How can any software be perfect?
by Gorgak on Tue 4th Dec 2007 13:05 UTC
Gorgak
Member since:
2007-05-30

After using my Mac for about year now, I'm seriously considering switching (back) to Linux. The completely inflexible window management drives me nuts, and the less I have to use the dock, the better.

But oh, I'm sorry, now I see that it's "perfect". I guess I'll have to try harder to adapt to my machine (here I was thinking that it should be the other way around).

Reply Score: 8

kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

After using my Mac for about year now, I'm seriously considering switching (back) to Linux. The completely inflexible window management drives me nuts, and the less I have to use the dock, the better.


So let me understand you right, you'll move from an operating system that has a vast array of software and hardware support to another operating system which has no software, hardly any hardware support - all simply to 'stick it to the man'.

Good luck on your 'rage against the machine'.

Reply Score: 2

rockwell Member since:
2005-09-13

// to another operating system [linux] which has no software, hardly any hardware support//

Funny, my Ubuntu install on my four-year-old laptop worked perfectly OOTB, and there are, literally, thousands of apps I can run on it. Including thousands more Windows apps, thanks to Crossover Office.

Stupid me, I guess.

Reply Score: 2

kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Funny, my Ubuntu install on my four-year-old laptop worked perfectly OOTB, and there are, literally, thousands of apps I can run on it. Including thousands more Windows apps, thanks to Crossover Office.


Thank you for proving my point; the only way you can run commercial applications is using an emulation tool - if you're going to use an emulator, you might as well use the real operating system.

I've got a tonne of awesome applications I run on Mac OS X, my printer is actually worked without needing to pay for a driver through third parties, there aren't strange compatibility issues; take Maple 11 and Matlab on Fedora 8, thanks to its use of libxcb 1.0 which lacks the ability to recognise the LIBXCB_ALLOW_SLOPPY_LOCK switch that would otherwise correct the problem. As an end user I don't want to have to go off and download the rawhide package simply to get compatibility - and possibly risk instability and security.

To simply make hyperbole because of problems which you NEVER actually mention - real tangible problems rather than simply 'Oh, I don't like that' speaks volumes to the lengths Apple haters have to go through to prop up their arguments.

Edited 2007-12-04 17:25

Reply Score: 4

OMRebel Member since:
2005-11-14

kaiwai, your zealotry is laughable. Let's take a look at what you're saying:

"Thank you for proving my point; the only way you can run commercial applications is using an emulation tool - if you're going to use an emulator, you might as well use the real operating system."

Are you able to run all commercial applications written for Windows or Linux without using an emulator of any sorts on OS X?

"I've got a tonne of awesome applications I run on Mac OS X, my printer is actually worked without needing to pay for a driver through third parties, there aren't strange compatibility issues;"

I can run thousands of applications on Ubuntu as well. My printer works perfectly and I didn't have to pay for a driver to get it working. Ubuntu recognized it just fine. I bet hard money that there are printers out there that don't work with OS X, just as there are with other OS's. Why buy a printer that's not compatible? That's such an ignorant argument that you're trying to make, and it's not even a halfway intelligent argument at that.

I'm glad you enjoy your overpriced hardware, and being locked in so tightly by one vendor. Meanwhile, I'll enjoy running Ubuntu, which I can do anything and everything that you can do on OS X, in addition to being able to upgrade my hardware whenever I feel like it without having to bend over and be forced to buy from only one vendor. Also, it's great to know that I don't have to pay for service packs like you Jobs worshipping fan boys do.

Reply Score: 4

OMRebel Member since:
2005-11-14

"So let me understand you right, you'll move from an operating system that has a vast array of software and hardware support to another operating system which has no software, hardly any hardware support - all simply to 'stick it to the man'. "

You couldn't have kept a straight face saying that. Ubuntu works on a hell of a lot on more hardware than OSX does. It's not even close. And don't even try to say that OSX has more available software. That's just flat out lying and you know it.

Apple is the biggest case of "vendor lock-in" out of any of the major platforms out there.

Reply Score: 5

kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

You couldn't have kept a straight face saying that. Ubuntu works on a hell of a lot on more hardware than OSX does. It's not even close. And don't even try to say that OSX has more available software. That's just flat out lying and you know it.


So I can get Adobe Creative Suite (THE WHOLE SUITE, not just Photoshop), iWorks, iLife, iTunes/Quicktime, Corel Painter, Microsoft Office etc. etc.

So no, it isn't a lie. A lie would be complaining about the lack of applications and all of the above are available on Linux.

Put down the Ubuntu kool aide, because it doesn't matter how of that stuff you drink, its not going to mask the lack of third party commercial applications, proper hardware support which fully supports all the features of the hardware.

Reply Score: 2

dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

No these applications don't run on Linux, but there are alternatives which rivals these applications in functionality. The applications are not important. It is the functionality of the applications that are important.

All of them have professional quality FLOSS alternatives. If you use Mac for DTP (quite common) then you have the option of using Scribus which rivals InDesign, PageMaker, and QuarkXPress, and is light years ahead of MS Publisher (the biggest joke in the DTP-world).

Add to that font rendering on Linux completely comparable to that of OS X (which is why FreeType infringes on Apple patents) and you have a worthy substitution.

Lay down your Linux-hates kaiwai. You're usually to smart for that kind of behaviour.

Reply Score: 3

kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Who said I hate Linux? I'm saying to keep things real and don't believe the hype that it has everything to be a Windows replacement.

It won't suit me, and it won't suit many people - but there are certain users who might find it suitable. My brothers desktop runs it (Fedora 8) along with Maple 11 and Matlab. He is happy with it. But for me, I prefer my MacBook.

I don't know where this 'all or nothing' idea comes from within the Linux community, because that sort of arrogance pisses me off. Why people here seem me using Mac OS X as a threat to Linux, god only knows.

Edited 2007-12-05 01:18

Reply Score: 3

dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

Then stop your attacks on Linux and your incorrect claims.

OS X is the main stream OS with the least hardware support (though of high quality - seems to be the classical quantity vs. quality) and Linux is the one with the broadest hardware support (though sometimes suboptimal - read before buying (that's true for Windows and OS X as well, though)).

The only hyped OS'es are Vista and OS X. There is no hype about Linux on the Desktop. There is however an awful lot of hype about Linux on the Server. And some miniscule hype about ubuntu (an african word meaning gentoo is too hard).

Nobody consider your use of OS X as a threat but your hilarious claim about no software for Linux and no hardware support makes you look like an idiot. I'm sad to see you degenerate that way. You ought to use Solaris on your desktop for a couple of days. That'll sanitize you ;)

Reply Score: 3

kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Nobody consider your use of OS X as a threat but your hilarious claim about no software for Linux and no hardware support makes you look like an idiot.


So you're now claiming to me that I can go down the road and select from a huge range of mainstream software from big name companies. But saying I'm lying, you're also saying that the above scenario is true.

I go down to Harvey Norman - where is the Linux Photoshop? the Linux MYOB? the Linux Painter? the Linux iWorks? the Linux support for my printer (Canon PIXMA IP1200 which is supported by Mac OS X out of the box), AAC support out of the box for my iPod etc. etc.

Again, obviously I've been using the 'wrong distribution' because according to your post, I'm a lying scum sucking roach who makes up all this stuff - so why don't you set the record straight and inform the forum as to where I can find Linux versions of all those applications, and a distribution that does all the above out of the box.

Edited 2007-12-05 03:18

Reply Score: 1

rockwell Member since:
2005-09-13

//Scribus which rivals InDesign, PageMaker, and QuarkXPress,//

I've tried Scribus. I use Quark. Scribus, you're no Quark.

(not by a looooooongshot.)

Reply Score: 0

tryphcycle Member since:
2006-02-16

"I've tried Scribus. I use Quark. Scribus, you're no Quark.

(not by a looooooongshot.)"


i can't help it... sorry! i use InDesign! Quark, you are NO InDesign!

(not by a LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOGshot!)

Reply Score: 0

tupp Member since:
2006-11-12

Are you saying that OSX has more applications than Linux? The Debian package repository contains over 18,200 applications: http://www.debian.org/releases/etch/i386/release-notes/ch-whats-new...

In addition, there are lots of Linux applications that are not included in the Debian repository, and Debian is only one distro in over 500 distros.

Also, why do you make a distinction in regard to third-party, commercial applications? What is so special about them? By the way, there are plenty of third-party, commercial applications that run nativly on Linux.

In regards to hardware, are you saying that OSX is compatible with more hardware than Linux?

Please clarify your arguments.

Edited 2007-12-05 02:37

Reply Score: 2

kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Are you saying that OSX has more applications than Linux? The Debian package repository contains over 18,200 applications: http://www.debian.org/releases/etch/i386/release-notes/ch-whats-new.....

In addition, there are lots of Linux applications that are not included in the Debian repository, and Debian is only one distro in over 500 distros.


Great, opensource crud - half finished applications where I am at the mercy of an developer who may or may not fix things as they arise. Or in the case of GIMP, you get abused when you report issues.

Also, why do you make a distinction in regard to third-party, commercial applications? What is so special about them? By the way, there are plenty of third-party, commercial applications that run nativly on Linux.


Because those opensource applications are shit compared to the commercially available ones. OpenOffice.org - what a bloody joke. Bloated, unstable and slow. Promising to deliver features which are standard in Office suites from 5 years ago.

Some of us want to use our computers for something more productive than debugging problems as they arise; we want software that is properly supported, updates released, and documentation properly maintained rather than being told to 'RTFM!' only to find that the FM hasn't be updated in 3 years.

Reply Score: 1

tupp Member since:
2006-11-12

Are you saying that OSX has more applications than Linux? The Debian package repository contains over 18,200 applications...
Great, opensource crud - half finished applications where I am at the mercy of an developer who may or may not fix things as they arise.


Since you didn't answer my question directly, I will assume that you concede that Linux has more applications than OSX. Glad we settled that argument.

In regards to the quality of open source code, I would have to say that it is usually better than proprietary code, but such a general statement is a matter of opinion, as is your broad characterization of open source as "crud".

On your more specific suggestion that open source applications are "half-finished," I am not sure what you mean by "finished." Do you think that development of your beloved OSX or Adobe Photoshop/Creative Suite is "finished?":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Mac_OS_X#Release_timeline
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_Photoshop_release_history

Also, users of proprietary software are likewise at the mercy of developers. However, such users suffer the added risk of having their application's development killed on the whim of an individual. In such a proprietary scenario, the users have no recourse but to switch to another similar application, just to keep abreast of advancements in the software. So, they have to spend more money and more time to purchase and learn a new program.

With open source software, others usually pick-up where the original developers leave off, and continue development, often taking the application down a new and innovative path. The open source users can keep their familiar UI, and, of course, the development is free.

In regards to fixing bugs, the open source model generally responds more quickly than its proprietary counterparts. You may recall the recently polemic file-moving-data-loss bug that plagued OSX over several major releases -- such a significant bug would have been corrected almost immediately in Linux and regular Unix.


OpenOffice.org - what a bloody joke. Bloated, unstable and slow.

I agree that OO is bloated. But so is every other current "office suite" I have encountered.

By the way, OO started-out as Star_Office -- proprietary code: http://www.openoffice.org/about_us/milestones.html


Promising to deliver features which are standard in Office suites from 5 years ago.

Don't know what you mean by this claim.


Some of us want to use our computers for something more productive than debugging problems as they arise...

Yes. And users of your beloved, proprietary Adobe Creative Suite are constantly having to debug problems as they arise: http://www.adobeforums.com/webx/.2ccd8a3d/

As are the users of your beloved, mostly proprietary OSX: http://macfixit.com/moreHotArticles.php


and documentation properly maintained rather than being told to 'RTFM!'

Are you referring to the proprietary documentation which causes OSX users and Adobe users to seek help on Web forums?

Incidentally, I have found most *nix forums to be just as friendly and helpful as their non-*nix counterparts.


Now, In light of your disdain for open source software, I would like to point-out that many millions of OSX and Windows users unknowingly employ open source software on their own computers, every day.

I am sure that you are aware of OSX's extensive use of open source code. For instance, CUPS was used in Linux long before it was adopted by Apple: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Unix_Printing_System#History

Also, Adobe Photoshop utilizes open source code. For example, Photoshop uses the Adobe Camera Raw plugin to import raw camera files (an essential function for pro photographers), and this plugin is derived from the open source dcraw: http://wiki.panotools.org/Dcraw

And let us not forget that the core of OSX (Darwin) is open source.

Since you did not answer my question about hardware compatability, I will assume that you also concede that Linux has greater hardware compatibilty than OSX.

Edited 2007-12-05 07:33

Reply Score: 3

WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

Great, opensource crud - half finished applications where I am at the mercy of an developer who may or may not fix things as they arise. Or in the case of GIMP, you get abused when you report issues.

Are you serious? I thought a bit higher of you but you're seriously ruining that image I had :O Sure, there are LOTS of open-source apps in serious need of fixing but that same applies to god knows how many commercial apps too! And you seem to imply that there doesn't exist any good open-source apps...Well, heard of CUPS? Firefox? MySQL? Even FreeType? Apache? Want me to go on?

Some of us want to use our computers for something more productive than debugging problems as they arise;

Yeah, but that has nothing to do with open-source versus commercial apps. You seem hellbent on claiming that commercial software is lightyears ahead of any open-source ones and when using commercial software you don't run into issues...Well, I have only one word for you: Windows. Think about it..

we want software that is properly supported, updates released, and documentation properly maintained rather than being told to 'RTFM!' only to find that the FM hasn't be updated in 3 years.

I have never been told to RTFM. Not even once. And all the software I use does indeed have good documentation and also helpful community backing them up. Darn, I can even chat with the developers if I wish and suggest ideas or some improvements whereas for commercial software that is not possible..

If you like your software then use it by all means but STOP lying that open-source apps are somehow inferior!

Reply Score: 3

kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Are you serious? I thought a bit higher of you but you're seriously ruining that image I had :O


Sorry I snapped before; basically a long and crappy day, oh, and low bloody sugar which compounds things 100x's over. Normally I'm a pretty melow person ;)

Sure, there are LOTS of open-source apps in serious need of fixing but that same applies to god knows how many commercial apps too! And you seem to imply that there doesn't exist any good open-source apps...Well, heard of CUPS? Firefox? MySQL? Even FreeType? Apache? Want me to go on?


Yes, there are some great opensource tools - reading back in retrospect, yes, I do use opensource applications, right now I'm using Camino because it supports Google services (Blogger, Youtube and Gmail). But with that being said, there are a good number of applications which simply can't be replaced.

Yeah, but that has nothing to do with open-source versus commercial apps. You seem hellbent on claiming that commercial software is lightyears ahead of any open-source ones and when using commercial software you don't run into issues...Well, I have only one word for you: Windows. Think about it..


Use iLife, iWorks, and Creative Suite, then try to say with a straight face that the opensource replacements are equal in features and quality.

I have never been told to RTFM. Not even once. And all the software I use does indeed have good documentation and also helpful community backing them up. Darn, I can even chat with the developers if I wish and suggest ideas or some improvements whereas for commercial software that is not possible..


I actually over 2 years ago attempted to try and work with GIMP developers to improve the user interface. I went to the official GIMP IRC chat server, went to the chat room, told them about my idea, then I was promptly abused by moderators and others, kicked then banned from the chat room.

I haven't stepped foot back into helping any opensource application - that one bad experience with GIMP has put me off helping any opensource project. Why should I volunteer my time only to get abused?

Reply Score: 2

dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

Well, Linux has a wider array of software (the widest of all OS'es (unless you count in all the malware and frivolous third party shareware for windows)) and no system supports as much hardware as Linux*, so the wiser choice would naturally be Linux. Linux today is the better DTP-platform compared with Windows and lacks nothing compared with Mac. Image editing is a different issue though.

* Other mainstream OS'es tend to rely on drivers from manufacturers and as can be seen from Windows this often leads to poor drivers, unless you're smart enough to use reference-drivers from the chip-makers. Even then they tend to suck.

Reply Score: 2

ssa2204 Member since:
2006-04-22

I would tend to disagree with this strongly. If anything Linux is still lacking tons of packages that have existed for years on Apple/Windows platform. Just one prime example, how many Usenet readers are their for Linux compared to Windows? Take a look at general network utilities offered at snapfiles.com compared to what Linux has. In fact it is this very reason why I keep Windows on my work laptop, besides the Cisco Network Assistant (java)there really is not the wealth of software. Some of the quick and easy tools such as Adrem's iTools I have never found an equivalent in OSS. Not to mention the fact that a lot of software is merely poorly maintained hobbies, and as such stability and compatibility issues mark them as almost non-existant.

Just because Ubuntu has more games loaded on it that either OSX or Windows does not mean that there are more games for Linux. Hell, there are more developers experienced with Windows than there are for Linux. I say this simply because as we subcontract out for projects the vast majority of resumes that we come across all have Windows oriented backgrounds. Any wonder why? Because most of these applicants worked for commercial software companies. In fact there is quite a few that had Linux experience but past employment was with Windows and Apple oriented software.

I am talking about professional, matured, quality, ready to use, etc.. software (however you want to put it). It does not take a rocket scientist a few minutes to look at the software available for any given application and utility to see that Windows still dominates the software industry. And I hardly can count numerous OSS projects that are in indefinite alpha/beta stage.

Reply Score: 1

hauger
Member since:
2005-12-05

Wow. A seven page press release as written by a hopped up marketing department.

To sum up:

The old version of OS X was PERFECT!
The new version of OS X is MORE PERFECT!
The next version of OS X will be unbearably SO PERFECT, the only way to make it better would be to make yet another version of OS X.

Reply Score: 14

EightBitHustler
Member since:
2007-11-12

Apple promised to release Java 1.6 in Leopard, it's not there. This is a non-starter for me and many other java developers out there who have macbooks. I'm sticking with Tiger until I feel Leopard is mature and supports the tools I need to get my work done. iPhoto, iMovie, iTunes are not going to help me pay the bills. Sorry apple, you make some kick ass looking machines with tight hardware, but you're beginning to piss-me-off on the software side. I'd be better off with a dell running ubuntu at this point.

Reply Score: 1

SlackerJack Member since:
2005-11-12

Well at least you have a choice, no Java 1.6 with Leopard boohoo. The last Java app I tried in OS X was azureus and what a big fat, slow memory hog that was. Whenever I see Java I insert 'Slow and bloated'

Reply Score: 2

rockwell Member since:
2005-09-13

//Whenever I see Java I insert 'Slow and bloated'//

Funny Java apps run fine on my Ubuntu install ... and on XP SP2, for that matter.

Perhaps the apps you use are 1.) on OS X, or 2.) poorly coded.

Reply Score: 1

nevali Member since:
2006-10-12

Apple promised to release Java 1.6 in Leopard, it's not there. This is a non-starter for me and many other java developers out there who have macbooks.


Er, they did? I'm pretty sure they didn't promise to ship Java 6 with Leopard, as it goes.

I'm sticking with Tiger until I feel Leopard is mature and supports the tools I need to get my work done.


Which is what everybody should be doing anyway. Me? I know there are a faults and weighed that up (I also know that none of them were likely to impact seriously enough to disrupt my day to day work, not everyone has that luxury). You do the same with any piece of software or hardware, surely?

The thrust of your argument seems to be that Apple hasn't delivered something that I'm not sure they said they would, in a product that you haven't actually gone out and bought, and so you're not going to buy it. I don't understand the need for vitriol or the “I'd be better off with a dell running ubuntu at this point”; it's a simple enough premise—one of my colleagues still runs Panther because it does everything he needs, and another runs Tiger for the same reasons.

Nobody needs to upgrade to Leopard (at least, not yet—there will inevitably be Leopard-requiring bits of software appearing soon, but Leopard should have matured by the time it goes mainstream).

Reply Score: 4

kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

I agree with what you've said in your post - good points made.

Nobody needs to upgrade to Leopard (at least, not yet—there will inevitably be Leopard-requiring bits of software appearing soon, but Leopard should have matured by the time it goes mainstream).


I agree. For me, I only moved to Leopard because of the uptodate programme. If I it weren't a free upgrade, I probably would have waited till next year some time - when AdiumX 2.0 and other Leopard application came out.

For me, I've had no problems yet, but I just get the feeling in some places it isn't as polished as it should be. Regarding Java, the rumour is that they're making big changes in the Mac OS X code which gets rid of all of the legacy code - possibly a move over to Cocoa and making it 64bit too.

At the end of the day; when you think of the 'Mac OS X" user base - does it matter that Java 6 is late? not really. Give that OpenJDK is being ported to Mac OS X - will it be an issue in future? if progress is made in OpenJDK, there won't be any more reliance on Apple.

Reply Score: 2

lol
by Oliver on Tue 4th Dec 2007 13:28 UTC
Oliver
Member since:
2006-07-15

It smells like a paid ad. I wouldn't even post such a nonsense on a blog/news site like OSNews. But who cares, people are good in self-destructing =)

Reply Score: 6

Leopard newuser experience...
by Quazion on Tue 4th Dec 2007 13:31 UTC
Quazion
Member since:
2007-12-04

I just bought a new macbook this week and i am not having any problems. I have an older iBook still running 10.2.8, so leopard feels as an improvement. Also i am using XP and Ubuntu on my other computers.

Leopard feels very snappy on the new macbook, it has worked without flaws for atleast the first week. I installed a number of programs including jEdit (Java), Fulltilt-poker, GIMP(X11) and Firefox without any problems. Only virtualbox seems to crash, but its still in BETA i think...

One thing i noticed which was really nice is that it auto-mounts my samba-shares after i browse them with the finder in /Volumes so i can use then in jEdit for example. This might allready be working in 10.4, but still its was a nice suprise for me.

Overall i am a happy camper, going to get parallels soon and see if i can get happier even more. One computer for all my web-development ;)

Reply Score: 1

Is this a joke?
by massysett on Tue 4th Dec 2007 14:04 UTC
massysett
Member since:
2007-12-04

"People buy Macs because the platform as a whole is perfect, full stop."

I stopped reading right there. This is a joke, right?

Reply Score: 7

RE: Is this a joke?
by orfanum on Tue 4th Dec 2007 14:36 UTC in reply to "Is this a joke?"
orfanum Member since:
2006-06-02

People buy Macs because of the hype, because they are sick of Windows (you have to remember that Windows to a lot of people gives them the feeling of being 'back at work' - you may have a clunky company car but a Mac at home is like a little sportster that says everything about you that doesn't get said by asociation with your job) and because it is a definite lifestyle/niche statement.

People leave Macs because of just such PR b*llshit, because of the relative lack of hardware, the OS release cycle pressure, and because after a while it feels more like an ornament than anything else.

*in my experience*!!

Reply Score: 6

RE[2]: Is this a joke?
by rockwell on Tue 4th Dec 2007 17:09 UTC in reply to "RE: Is this a joke?"
rockwell Member since:
2005-09-13

//you may have a clunky company car but a Mac at home is like a little sportster //

More like a six-year-old Ford Escort, based on my 1st-gen Mac Mini. That thing is slower than molasses in January. 1.4 Ghz G4, with 1 GB RAM.

Of course, *in my experience* as well. :-)

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Is this a joke?
by TomB7 on Tue 4th Dec 2007 17:32 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Is this a joke?"
TomB7 Member since:
2006-01-03

I've got the same model, and the performance for Video work and Neverwinter Nights is more than adequate. PRICE/performance was quite good when I bought it.

Reply Score: 1

v RE[4]: Is this a joke?
by rockwell on Tue 4th Dec 2007 18:53 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Is this a joke?"
RE[5]: Is this a joke?
by TomB7 on Tue 4th Dec 2007 19:35 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Is this a joke?"
TomB7 Member since:
2006-01-03

"Er ... NWN is so 2002. But anyway."

I'm not a gamer. OK?

Reply Score: 1

v RE[6]: Is this a joke?
by rockwell on Tue 4th Dec 2007 21:36 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Is this a joke?"
RE[7]: Is this a joke?
by TomB7 on Tue 4th Dec 2007 21:45 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Is this a joke?"
TomB7 Member since:
2006-01-03

I picked the most demanding things I do; I wasn't intended to give a PC World-style product review.

Reply Score: 1

I've used Leopard since day 1
by nevali on Tue 4th Dec 2007 14:05 UTC
nevali
Member since:
2006-10-12

…and I'm very happy with it.

But I wouldn't, by any means, give it 10/10.

There are flaws, there are faults, and there are niggles. They're minor, but they're there all the same.

The “perfect 10” operating system would be open source, have the look and feel of Mac OS X with some tweaks, not suffer from the niggles that Leopard does, and run everything that I can on FreeBSD, Solaris and Mac OS X itself. Right now, that operating system doesn't exist.

In truth, Leopard isn't hugely far off it: it's not open source, which is more of a philosophical problem than a practical one for me (though others obviously will feel differently); it's not without its problems, so it loses points there; the UNIX03 certification should make life easier for porters—although it may well cause headaches in the short term because people have previously put workarounds in place for Darwin.

With that in mind, from my perspective, it can't possibly be a perfect ten, though it could hit eight right now and nine if the various niggles are sorted out. However, other people will measure based on their own metrics; if Mac OS Classic support is important, it'll score low; if better CIFS support (notably with W2K3 server and Vista) is an issue, then it'll score more highly; if you have an Airport Disk, it'll lose a point or two; if you really wish there was a user-visible option to switch the dock and menu bar back to how they were in Tiger (I don't, for the record), it'll lose another point, and so on.

It's always going to be subjective, but I honestly struggle to think of how your view can be that limited that you can describe any software product of Leopard's size as being perfect; it makes a mockery of the review process, and raises accusations of astroturfing. My gut feeling is that Apple isn't retarded enough to stoop so low, so maybe the reviewer just got a free iMac and wants to return the favour—who knows?

Reply Score: 3

RE: I've used Leopard since day 1
by andrew on Wed 5th Dec 2007 04:28 UTC in reply to "I've used Leopard since day 1"
andrew Member since:
2005-06-30

Ok, I'm all about open source..

But why does the perfect OS have to be open source? What does that have to do with anything?

Reply Score: 1

nevali Member since:
2006-10-12

But why does the perfect OS have to be open source? What does that have to do with anything?


Ultimate longevity and flexibility. I've lost track of the number of little niggles I've (hackily) fixed on my own running copies of Mac OS X thanks to big chunks of it using or being released as open source.

Pretty much everybody who doesn't have a vested interest will agree that all things being equal, open source is preferable to closed source (especially when it comes to operating systems).

Therefore, for the OS to be perfect, it must be open source.

As I said, though, how important this is varies massively from individual to individual.

Reply Score: 3

Proposal to OSNews crew
by croco on Tue 4th Dec 2007 14:05 UTC
croco
Member since:
2005-09-16

Somehow by reading the linked article one interesting (and for sure not original) idea came to my mind. How about to give OSNews readers a possibility to vote for "POS of the year" article? (POS = Piece Of S***) Every registered user can have let's say 12 "POS Vote Points" in a year.

It's not a joke! So what do you say?

Reply Score: 9

RE: Proposal to OSNews crew
by Laurence on Tue 4th Dec 2007 17:22 UTC in reply to "Proposal to OSNews crew"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

"Somehow by reading the linked article one interesting (and for sure not original) idea came to my mind. How about to give OSNews readers a possibility to vote for "POS of the year" article? (POS = Piece Of S***) Every registered user can have let's say 12 "POS Vote Points" in a year.

It's not a joke! So what do you say?"


Great idea.

I'd love to even just have the option to vote articles down.

Reply Score: 5

Odd way of balancing things
by Karig on Tue 4th Dec 2007 14:11 UTC
Karig
Member since:
2007-04-27

Apparently this over-the-top "Leopard and Vista aren't comparable at all" article that has nothing but adulation for Leopard is intended to balance out the other over-the-top "Leopard IS Vista!!!" article that had nothing but scorn for Leopard.

Reply Score: 4

Blows away Mac users expections?
by mikeurbandz on Tue 4th Dec 2007 14:50 UTC
mikeurbandz
Member since:
2007-10-29

Well, I am a former Mac user, and Leopard did not blow away my expectations. In fact, it's what caused me to give up on my Mac and switch to Linux and Windows. So blanket statements like "Leopard blows away Mac users expectations" are not only dishonest. But not exactly even close to the truth. More and more people seem to have a lot of complaints about Leopard lately now that the initial launch hype has mostly gone away.

Of course, you'd never know it by looking at Apple's forums, since their forum fascists outright delete threads where anyone says anything negative about their experience with OS X.

Reply Score: 4

Here we go again.
by Buck on Tue 4th Dec 2007 14:53 UTC
Buck
Member since:
2005-06-29

So why is it exactly that we have reviews that are either written by the clueless morons who jumped on Leopard without researching it and then complain about the new dock like it's the end of the world, or we have these insane PR pieces that everyone knows are BULLSHIT?!
Seriously know, there are millions of decent, unbiased and balanced reviews on the net. Posting this is just provoking a needless discussion on topics other than the OS itself. I really really hate that.

Reply Score: 3

peer review anyone?
by Robocoastie on Tue 4th Dec 2007 14:58 UTC
Robocoastie
Member since:
2005-09-15

so this article says Leopard is perfect, and another article half a page down points out major flaws. OSNews really needs to have articles pass peer review or better editing approval before it publishes articles.

Reply Score: 2

RE: peer review anyone?
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 4th Dec 2007 15:01 UTC in reply to "peer review anyone?"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

so this article says Leopard is perfect, and another article half a page down points out major flaws. OSNews really needs to have articles pass peer review or better editing approval before it publishes articles.


Yeah and then we'd get the zealots out in full force "Why didn't you publish this", and "cencorship" and "you are anti-Mac by not publishing this", and, of course, "you eat babies!" (they're actually quite tasty).

If this is really worth getting your knickers in a twist over...

Edited 2007-12-04 15:01 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: peer review anyone?
by Buck on Tue 4th Dec 2007 15:21 UTC in reply to "RE: peer review anyone?"
Buck Member since:
2005-06-29

"you eat babies!"

Oh shut up. That's not funny or witty at all.
All we ask for is that you start publishing decent articles instead of using OSNews as an outlet for some low-quality crap.
Trust me, nobody's going to accuse you of being anti-mac or anti-anything then.

Reply Score: 5

RE[3]: peer review anyone?
by BluenoseJake on Tue 4th Dec 2007 16:43 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: peer review anyone?"
BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

"Trust me, nobody's going to accuse you of being anti-mac or anti-anything then."

People accuse them of those very things all the time.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: peer review anyone?
by Soulbender on Tue 4th Dec 2007 15:22 UTC in reply to "RE: peer review anyone?"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

So instead of actually do some vetting and not post links to completely outrageously positive/negative articles you're just going to post whatever the hell comes along, no matter how bad it is?
Awesome.

Reply Score: 6

RE[3]: peer review anyone?
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 4th Dec 2007 15:27 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: peer review anyone?"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

So instead of actually do some vetting and not post links to completely outrageously positive/negative articles you're just going to post whatever the hell comes along, no matter how bad it is?


So, all our articles are crap like this? If they are, than why are you still here?

Yes, we publish crap every now and then. It happens, get over it already, nothing to get your knickers in a twist about.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: peer review anyone?
by Soulbender on Tue 4th Dec 2007 15:30 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: peer review anyone?"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

So, all our articles are crap like this?


That's not at all what I said.

Yes, we publish crap every now and then. It happens, get over it already, nothing to get your knickers in a twist about.


I'm already over it but that doesn't mean I can't have the opinion that it's not a good thing and that obviously bad articles like this one shouldnt have fallen through the net.

Reply Score: 5

RE[4]: peer review anyone?
by pxa270 on Tue 4th Dec 2007 15:50 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: peer review anyone?"
pxa270 Member since:
2006-01-08


So, all our articles are crap like this? If they are, than why are you still here?

Yes, we publish crap every now and then. It happens, get over it already, nothing to get your knickers in a twist about.


Wait, are you saying that you think this article is crap? And did you think so when you decided to post it?

Edited 2007-12-04 15:51

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: peer review anyone?
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 4th Dec 2007 16:22 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: peer review anyone?"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Wait, are you saying that you think this article is crap? And did you think so when you decided to post it?


Ever heard of the concept: error in judgement? Contrary to popular belief, I'm just human, so I make mistakes. So do the rest of the crew. It's just that we don't remove articles afterwards, it's policy. Once it's up there, it's up there, and we take responsibility.

Can we now PLEASE get over this? Wait for our own Leopard review, will be much, much, much better.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: peer review anyone?
by dylansmrjones on Wed 5th Dec 2007 00:13 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: peer review anyone?"
dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

Thom, you ought to be man enough to step forward and say: "Okay, I screwed up. The article sux and should not have been posted - at least not without a warning. I apologize for my error in judgment".

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: peer review anyone?
by Thom_Holwerda on Wed 5th Dec 2007 10:36 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: peer review anyone?"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Which is EXACTLY what I did.

http://www4.osnews.com/permalink?288319

Reply Score: 1

A bit of a "sensational" article isn't it?
by OMRebel on Tue 4th Dec 2007 15:08 UTC
OMRebel
Member since:
2005-11-14

I'm not a Mac user, so I can't comment from any of my experiences, but I've seen plenty of complaints by others who do use OSX and Leopard to know that it isn't "perfect".

I'm a bit shocked such an article like this would actually make it to this site. Maybe we'll see a "Vista is a Perfect 10" article next?

Reply Score: 2

v MS not in the same ballpark
by TomB7 on Tue 4th Dec 2007 15:09 UTC
RE: MS not in the same ballpark
by BluenoseJake on Tue 4th Dec 2007 16:42 UTC in reply to "MS not in the same ballpark"
BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

"Windows hasn't even been upgraded to UNIX"

Thank god. There are some things that are good about UNIX, and somethings that suck and the other way around. I don't need all the things that suck about Windows and all the things that suck about UNIX all wrapped up in one neat package.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: MS not in the same ballpark
by TomB7 on Tue 4th Dec 2007 17:28 UTC in reply to "RE: MS not in the same ballpark"
TomB7 Member since:
2006-01-03

"I don't need all the things that suck about Windows and all the things that suck about UNIX all wrapped up in one neat package"

Well put. You KNOW that's how it would end up....

Reply Score: 1

Blows away nothing, blows away everything
by rockwell on Tue 4th Dec 2007 15:33 UTC
rockwell
Member since:
2005-09-13

It totally depends on what you use your computer for.

I like to play computer games. So, OS X Leopard doesn't blow me away at all, unless I want to play games three years after everyone else does.

If I were a graphic artist or big into digital audio/photography, then a Mac would be the best choice.

Reply Score: 1

Mage66
Member since:
2005-07-11

But, I'm not having any problems with it on my G5 iMac, and once I sell my G5, I'll be in the market for a newer, Intel Mac.

I like Leopard. It works fine. No problems at all.

Reply Score: 1

RE: RE[2]: Bad post
by protagonist on Tue 4th Dec 2007 16:35 UTC
protagonist
Member since:
2005-07-06

"Of course it's up to you what you link, I just think that having some sort of standard wouldn't hurt and that linked article is just bad. Not because it's badly written but because it's wrong and not an honest review."

Actually, I always thought one of primary purposes of OSNews was to not only bring us the news, but to also promote discussion of that news. If that were not so then why even have a comments section? That being said, what kind of discussion would we be able to have if OSNews only published or linked to articles we all agreed with?

While I do not agree with the author on this subject I feel he is entitled to his opinion. If he wants to be an idiot that is his right. Anyway, this comment is being posted via my BSD machine because my OS X "Tiger" machine is shut down due to a power failure in the area. When you are running on battery backup a 350W power supply has precedence over a 600W power supply.

Reply Score: 2

The secret to happiness...
by fretinator on Tue 4th Dec 2007 16:40 UTC
fretinator
Member since:
2005-07-06

is apparently low expectations.

Leopard blows away Mac users' expectations

Reply Score: 6

I Was Happy
by erikharmon on Tue 4th Dec 2007 17:01 UTC
erikharmon
Member since:
2007-06-20

I was a little hesitant to upgrade, but I did and I'm happy. It runs faster on my Macbook Pro than Tiger, for example window management is quicker, the UI is slightly more responsive in general, and faster user switching is tolerable now. I haven't really had problems with the pseudo-transparent menu bar or the new dock. Finder is better now.

Downside, while it runs faster on my Macbook Pro, it makes my Mac Mini 1.2Ghz PowerPC run slower. Spaces is not even as intuitive as Desktop Manager, which I still use now. In short, not a perfect 10, but other than the speed problems on older-but-hardly-obsolete Macs, I'm happy.

Reply Score: 1

Nothing is Perfect
by dtravis7 on Tue 4th Dec 2007 17:14 UTC
dtravis7
Member since:
2005-07-14

Nothing made by humans is perfect. Leopard is a great OS but not perfect. Nothing is.

Reply Score: 1

Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard
by Macintosh Sauce on Tue 4th Dec 2007 17:23 UTC
Macintosh Sauce
Member since:
2007-05-03

After upgrading from Tiger to Leopard, and then also upgrading the RAM on my Mac Pro to 16 GB, all I have to say about Leopard is this.

ABSOLUTELY BEAUTIFUL! ;)

Also, I am running Windows XP Professional in VMware Fusion for productivity apps only. With 4 GB of RAM allocated to the virtual environment and one of my two dual core Xeon processors, it is FAST!

With BootCamp, I am running Windows XP Professional natively for gaming only. AWESOME!

Edited 2007-12-04 17:25

Reply Score: 1

RE: Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard
by rockwell on Tue 4th Dec 2007 18:55 UTC in reply to "Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard"
rockwell Member since:
2005-09-13

//After upgrading from Tiger to Leopard, and then also upgrading the RAM on my Mac Pro to 16 GB,//

Good grief. 16 GB of RAM? ANY OS would run fine on that!!!

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard
by Macintosh Sauce on Tue 4th Dec 2007 22:55 UTC in reply to "RE: Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard"
Macintosh Sauce Member since:
2007-05-03

// Good grief. 16 GB of RAM? ANY OS would run fine on that!!!

Yes, and now I finally have the computer setup I have always wanted. ;) I have had to use low end computers for many years, but last year I decided to purchase the Mac Pro and I have not regretted that decision. It is a beautiful machine IMO.

Reply Score: 1

v RE[3]: Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard
by rockwell on Wed 5th Dec 2007 17:02 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard"
RE[2]: Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard
by dylansmrjones on Wed 5th Dec 2007 00:15 UTC in reply to "RE: Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard"
dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

Crap... what a biiiiiig machine. I want one of those. I can have several of my linux installations in the RAM alone ;)

Reply Score: 2

Thanks,
by Matt24 on Tue 4th Dec 2007 17:26 UTC
Matt24
Member since:
2005-07-23

for all those who told me OSX.5 ain't perfect, makes a rude end to my perfect delusion.

Reply Score: 2

Kinda disagree about OS X..
by WereCatf on Tue 4th Dec 2007 18:50 UTC
WereCatf
Member since:
2006-02-15

"No one is unhappy with Mac OS X Version 10.4, known as Tiger. OS X is not an application platform that needed repair, speeding up, or exterior renovation."

Well, I have recently played around with an iMac G5 quite a bit and I do agree that OSX looks quite nice. But I am quite unhappy actually with it. I didn't feel at home there, I think Finder just quite plain sucks, and I was shocked to find that it doesn't even show thumbnails of files :O Nautilus has showed such for who knows how many years and since OSX is always praised as the Holy Grail of OS design and implementation I had not even thought Finder would not show thumbnails of files :O Anyways, in general I was just displeased and yearned back to Linux.. My partner in life is accustomed to OSX since it's her computer but even she would like Linux better. The only reason we (I, she doesn't yet have the skills ;) ) can't replace OSX with Linux is that she wants to keep playing WoW ;)

Reply Score: 1

RE: Kinda disagree about OS X..
by rockwell on Tue 4th Dec 2007 21:49 UTC in reply to "Kinda disagree about OS X.."
rockwell Member since:
2005-09-13

//The only reason we (I, she doesn't yet have the skills ;) ) can't replace OSX with Linux is that she wants to keep playing WoW ;) //

Actually ...

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,2036102,00.asp

Reply Score: 0

RE: Kinda disagree about OS X..
by ninjawombat on Tue 4th Dec 2007 21:57 UTC in reply to "Kinda disagree about OS X.."
ninjawombat Member since:
2007-11-17

Except that OSX has awesome thumbnails that if you zoom them big enough you can even read a Word or PDF document from the thumnail, seriously how much time did you say you spent playing with it!?

Not feeling at home has very little to do with the quality or design of an OS and 95% to do with your past experience, OS history, and knowledge of the platform. You probably spent years tweaking Linux and finding just the right tools and utilities have things the way you like them. This cannot be replicated in 5 minutes with OSX (neither can the reverse, no one would appreciate Linux after playing with it for only a few days). Prolonged use is where the overall design of an OS truly reveals itself, and OSX is one of these OS' that gets out if your way and reduces headaches (most of the time). I do prefer Linux for certain tasks but it nowhere approaches OSX in terms of behind the scenes elegance imho.

Reply Score: 1

WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

Nope, I wasn't even saying that feeling at home has anything to do with the quality of the OS. But heck, I was browsing the files with Finder and didn't see any darn thumbnails and that's the thing that annoyed me the most. Also I forgot to mention it's Tiger not Leopard. We're not upgrading cos we just don't have a single reason to do so. But so, doesn't the Finder in Tiger support thumbnails or does the user have to somehow enable them...?

Also note that I am not bashing OSX in any way, I just find Linux much better. Though there's one feature in OSX which I find particularly interesting: Automator. Someone should create something similar for the Linux desktops too :O

PS. Someone suggested using Crossover to run WoW.. Well, you missed the fact that it's a iMac G5 and as such not an Intel one..

Reply Score: 2

Credibility=0...thanks Infoworld
by ssa2204 on Tue 4th Dec 2007 21:49 UTC
ssa2204
Member since:
2006-04-22

Coming on the heels of the recent Gamespot editorial PR disaster, I find a lot in common with this so called review. Leopard does seem to be a very good OS for it's base, but with that said it is not like there have not been complaints. Give me ANY OS or application for that matter that is a perfect 10. It simply can not or does not exist unfortunately. I would be equally dismayed if they gave the article a 1 score trashing it. I do not use Leopard, but I can say that from everything I have read to date across numerous sites it does seem to be a good OS, but does have a variety of issues. When a review like this comes out I really have to question the integrity of the site and reviewer. But then again I would do the same of any review of any OS, application, or game. And game sites are nothing more than PR tools for the gaming community, their ability to objectively review games is a joke, and has been for years. That is almost to be expected, but coming from Infoworld I am somewhat shocked that they would allow this. The problem is not so much the article, as the editorial control, which seemed to be non-existant. Did not one editor bother to question?

Reply Score: 1

Perfect 10, haha...
by asr4096 on Tue 4th Dec 2007 22:32 UTC
asr4096
Member since:
2007-09-18

Just choose Black as a background-color in Icon view. Then you will witness what the "most advanced OS" <cough, cough> is capable of...

Reply Score: 1

Steve, is that you?
by noamsml on Wed 5th Dec 2007 12:12 UTC
noamsml
Member since:
2005-07-09

Steve! Long time no see! Still up to your old tricks?

Reply Score: 1