Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 29th Oct 2007 20:27 UTC
Mac OS X "While the Apple hype machine and its fanatical followers would have you believe that Mac OS X 10.5 'Leopard' is a major upgrade to the company's venerable operating system, nothing could be further from the truth. Instead, Leopard is yet another evolutionary upgrade in a long line of evolutionary OS X upgrades, all of which date back to the original OS X release in 2001. But let me get one huge misunderstanding out of the way immediately: That's not a dig at Leopard at all. Indeed, if anything, Apple is in an enviable position: OS X is so solid, so secure, and so functionally excellent that it must be getting difficult figuring out how to massage another USD 129 out even the most ardent fans. Folks, Leopard is good stuff. But then that's been true of Mac OS X for quite a while now." Additionally, Apple acknowledges installation problems caused by Unsanity's APE, while others are complaining about problems with Java, or visual oddities. Additionally, there are hacks that restore the black dock triangles, opacify the menubar, and to enable Time Machine on Airport disks. Update: It appears the Leopard firewall has a dent in its armour.
Thread beginning with comment 281695
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
sappyvcv
Member since:
2005-07-06

WHICH IS FALSE! JUST REPARTITION YOUR DRIVE STUPID!

This is just classic. Completely defeat the purpose of a backup by enabling it on the same drive. Oh god.

For example, he says that both Vista and Leopard were late but from his wording, it sounds like vista was a about month later than Leopard. Yup, 4 years is only a bit more than 3 months. Bravo Paul, Bravo.

I believe based on officially announced release dates, Vista was no more late than Leopard was.

Reply Parent Score: 9

leos Member since:
2005-09-21

This is just classic. Completely defeat the purpose of a backup by enabling it on the same drive. Oh god.


It won't protect against hardware failure, but it will keep track of previous versions, so it's still very useful if your drive doesn't die.

Reply Parent Score: 5

sultanqasim Member since:
2006-10-28

True, the '03, 04 and 05 release dates weren't formally announced but how about this? http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2004/aug04/08-27target2006...

Still an year late.

Time Machine Has 2 Purposes. one is back up for an emergency failure and the other is to recover lost files and revert to older versions of files. For hard drive failure, your point is valid. But if you just want to recover lost files and old versions, backing up onto the same hard drive is fine. If he wants a failure backup, why is he complaining about needing an external drive?

I'm not saying Leopard is perfect (there are still many areas where improvement is possible/needed) but many of Paul Thurrot's points are quite weak. After all, he runs the windows supersite. He ought to be biased towards windows just like a mac fan will be biased towards macs.

Edited 2007-10-30 00:23

Reply Parent Score: 1

sappyvcv Member since:
2005-07-06

Yeah. It says they will "target", not release.

Reply Parent Score: 1

ebac Member since:
2007-10-30

>>WHICH IS FALSE! JUST REPARTITION YOUR DRIVE STUPID!
>>
>This is just classic. Completely defeat the purpose of a backup by >enabling it on the same drive. Oh god.

not really

>> For example, he says that both Vista and Leopard were late but
>> from his wording, it sounds like vista was a about month later than
>> Leopard. Yup, 4 years is only a bit more than 3 months. Bravo Paul,
>> Bravo.

>I believe based on officially announced release dates, Vista was no
>more late than Leopard was.

HAHAHA that is funny ;) ))) I wish MS learns to ship there products when they say they will. Not delaying them for YEARS. Lets see when will they ship Windows 7 from the officially announced (2-2.5 years after Vista ships) and we are already half way there and there is nothing yet out and there wont be until who knows when. Dream on bro.... But that is very funny what you wrote! ;) ))))))

Reply Parent Score: 2