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 281771
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
This is quite amusing
by Darkelve on Tue 30th Oct 2007 07:35 UTC
Darkelve
Member since:
2006-02-06

The interesting thing is Thurrot's 'suggestive wording'. While he does have some good points, they are buried in the suggestive wording of the article. The intention seems to be to paint a bright(er) view of Vista while appearing to talk about Leopard.

Let's read between the lines:

"While the Apple hype machine"
Translation: Apple is nothing more than a hype machine

"and its fanatical followers"
Translation: Apple users are fanboys

"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."

Translation: actually it's not a major upgrade at all (like Vista is)

"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."

Translation: Apple has not succeeded in delivering a revolutionary upgrade ever since original OS X in 2001.

"But let me get one huge misunderstanding out of the way immediately: That's not a dig at Leopard at all."

Translation: let me regain some of my lost credibility so I can continue to manipulate you through the rest of the article.

"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 $129 out even the most ardent fans."

Translation: 129*5=645 , hey that's even more than Vista Ultimate! ('Apple users sure pay a lot')

"See the compliment for what it is: As is the case with Windows these days, it's getting hard for Apple to top the last release."

Translation: in the following paragraphs I am going to make faulty comparisons in order to make Vista look better.
(Some example quote tidbits):

- 'Unlike Leopard, Windows Vista has been rearchitected from the ground up'
- 'Meanwhile, Leopard is an incremental, evolutionary update over the previous release with no major architectural changes, which makes me wonder why Apple is even charging for it: In the Windows world, such releases are called service packs.'

"With that clearing of the air out of the way"
Translation: desinformation mission accomplished

"Is it enough to make Vista users switch to the Dark Side? You know, I don't believe so, but I'll get to that in a bit."

Translation: since the objective is to make Vista look better, you really didn't think I was going to say they were going to switch, were you?

'even a casual examination of the new feature list reveals that the vast majority of those "features" are hardly anything to write home about'

Translation: there are not many really worthwhile improvements in Leopard.

"There's Time Machine, a bizarre take on the Previous Versions feature in Windows."
Translation: Time Machine fscks, all hail Previous Versions

"And there's Spaces, a pleasant graphical front-end to the workspaces functionality that's been available in UNIX and Linux since, well, forever. What's old is new again."
Translation: this Leopard is a copycat

I'm going to stop here, the rest of the article follows the same theme/meme. Just count the amount of negatives in the articles:
- 'nothing could be further from the truth'
- 'that it must be getting difficult figuring out how to massage another $129 out even the most ardent fans'
- 'Both Leopard and Vista were horribly late'
- 'Unlike Leopard, Windows Vista has been rearchitected from the ground up'
- 'no major architectural changes
- 'which makes me wonder why Apple is even charging for it'
- 'that the vast majority of those "features" are hardly anything to write home about'
- 'there are precious few truly new features'
- 'Time Machine, a bizarre take on the Previous Versions feature in Windows'
- 'workspaces functionality that's been available in UNIX and Linux since, well, forever. What's old is new again.'
- 'though third party tools have provided most of this functionality for years'
- 'with a truly juvenile user interface, one that is horribly out of place'
- 'The restore UI, as mentioned previously, is absolutely insane.'
- 'Not to belabor the point, but this is a problem Vista users won't face
- 'Apple takes a big step back in Leopard'
- 'The effect is ugly'
- 'It just looks ugly.'
- 'worse is the updated dock'.
- 'As ever, the Dock is a usability nightmare'
- 'Its added a useful if limited new feature called Stacks to the Dock to close the gap with the superior and more logical Windows Start Menu'
- 'Apple's lackluster Safari Web browser '
- 'It's not like OS X, which has had no real world viruses or malware attacks over the year, has gotten any more secure in a realistic sense.'
- 'shipping such an inconsequential upgrade in the wake of Hurricane Vista was a mistake'

Paul's conclusion: Leopard is 'good'... and by good he means: incomplete, expensive and (drum roll) NOT AS GOOD AS VISTA (all hail Longhorn).

I'll take the Ars Technica review over this drivel any day, thank you very much.

Edited 2007-10-30 07:38

Reply Score: 20

RE: This is quite amusing
by pythonguy on Tue 30th Oct 2007 10:06 in reply to "This is quite amusing"
pythonguy Member since:
2005-07-22

I agree. The article is full of double-talk. While appearing to do a review of Leopard, it is in fact trying to do a not-so-subtle comparison of Leopard vs Vista, which is many times in-your-face and utterly unprofessional from someone like Thurrot. The entire gist of the article is aimed at holding Windows users who could be eyeing the purchase of a new Mac in the holiday season with Leopard on it.

Also, Thurrot is trying his very best to make the (uninformed) reader believe that Leopard is nothing but a poor copy of Vista and it will be a very bad idea to switch to the "Dark SIde". See these pearls of wisdom for illustration...

"Indeed, the parallels between Vista and Leopard are hard to ignore, and not just because Jobs and Company have spent the past several years being more fixated on Vista than perhaps even I've been."

We know who run the copiers and in which direction. It would be stupid to argue that Leopard was delayed so it could copy the "fine" features from Vista. The 6 months delay was due to reassignment of internal resources to the iPhone project.

"here's Time Machine, a bizarre take on the Previous Versions feature in Windows."

No sense in comparing a server-only feature with one of the best features in Leopard, which has been pretty nicely done. It looks like Apple might actually succeed in making backing up look like a sexy thing to do with the "bizzarre" interface and all, which Microsoft has been unsuccessful in doing even with their many years of Desktop domination. The only thing lacking from it is that it backs up whole files instead of diffs, but this could be on the way when the Mac port of ZFS is complete.

"Its added a useful if limited new feature called Stacks to the Dock to close the gap with the superior and more logical Windows Start Menu."

I do not get the comparison. Windows start menu is a completely different user interface from the Dock. The Windows start menu is like an "application menu" for the entire Windows, where as the dock isn't. The Stacks /grid feature gives an entirely different user experience from the Windows menu.

"Apple's file manager application, the Finder, has always been adequate, but this time around it's been upgraded with a number of Vista-like features, including a new look and feel (based, go figure, on iTunes) and a semi-customizable sidebar."

Again the not-so-subtle talk about the reverse xerox at work...

There are many more. I dont want to carp on these. The article should be renamed as "A comparison between Leopard and my favorite Vista" instead of "Apple Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard review".

Paul, do yourself a favor and read up the excellent and informative article on Leopard by the consistent
John Siracusa who actually seems to know what he is writing about. I would take a Windows review anyday from you, but you have not done your homework before doing this Leopard "review".

Reply Parent Score: 9

RE: This is quite amusing
by protagonist on Tue 30th Oct 2007 15:22 in reply to "This is quite amusing"
protagonist Member since:
2005-07-06

Hey, thanks for the great rebuttal. I laughed all the way through it. It seems like such a waste of talent, though, taking all that time replying to such a bad article. :-) I had a much easier time wading through the Ars article. They at least seemed to be a bit more objective.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: This is quite amusing
by evangs on Tue 30th Oct 2007 15:53 in reply to "This is quite amusing"
evangs Member since:
2005-07-07

- 'Unlike Leopard, Windows Vista has been rearchitected from the ground up'
- 'Meanwhile, Leopard is an incremental, evolutionary update over the previous release with no major architectural changes, which makes me wonder why Apple is even charging for it: In the Windows world, such releases are called service packs.'


Given John Siracusa's excellent article on Mac OS X just a few days ago, that statement is laughable. For example, the kernel and the addition of DTrace, FSEvents, Resolution independence and better task scheduling. These aren't necessarily visible to the user, but they require a lot of work to implement.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE: This is quite amusing
by DigitalAxis on Tue 30th Oct 2007 19:35 in reply to "This is quite amusing"
DigitalAxis Member since:
2005-08-28

I look forward to reading "Linux: It's better than smashing your thumb repeatedly with a hammer" in the near future.

Reply Parent Score: 3