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 281816
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Hey Quicks Draw
by babaloo on Tue 30th Oct 2007 12:51 UTC
Member since:

Greetings all, allow me to introduce myself.

I'm not a developer, or computer professional of any kind, just someone interested with technology in general.
Mac is my platform of choice, I dabble in Linux and recommend it to many people, I don't use any MS products, I have used a terminal, but for my needs it is not required, I am a software junky of sorts and have discovered a lot of great apps over the years from the open source community, and third party developers, that I use on a daily basis.

Unlike an average user, I have to know how everything works, and what it does, so when I upgrade my OS, or load new software, I open every app on the system, press every button, look at and reset all the preferences to my liking, and see what they do, if it's useful, I use it, if not, and if its not essential to the OS, I toss it.

I've been coming to read articles at osnews on a daily basis for about five years now, I have posted a couple times in Mac threads, got jumped on once by the experts, but all in all, through all the bickering between the various camps, I've learned a lot.

After reading the Ars article yesterday, I read Thurrott's piece.
What can I say, it's already been said further up the thread, and quite well I might add.

Regarding the incredible high cost of OS X's incremental upgrades.

Coming from 10.28, I was happy to be able to drop $129.00 on 10.4.8 for the speed bump alone, and it will serve me well on my 1 gig lamp for years to come, or until I purchase a new Mac with 10.5 or 10.6, or whatever, and if they don't anger me.

Tiger also runs great on a 400 mhz G3 Sawtooth with 640 mb of ram, but you can probably run Vista on old hardware just as well I would assume, although I know nothing about Vista except for what I've read here at OSnews.
(had to take at least one cheap shot)

Just imagine what that guy running classic is going to do when he upgrades to the latest version of OS X, it will be like getting a brand new computer for $129.00!

Concerning the chink in OS X's armor, specifically the horrible firewall.
Like I said I'm not a computer professional, I've been doing a little reading, and I know there are people here who can answer my question and shed some light on my shortcomings, without crucifying me.

Is it possible that the passive ftp mode in: system preferences/network, show: VPN/proxies/ passive FTP mode, has anything to do with the firewall fault.

Please be gentle with me, I like my babies and puppies deep fried!

Reply Score: 3

RE: Hey Quicks Draw
by apoclypse on Tue 30th Oct 2007 15:20 in reply to "Hey Quicks Draw"
apoclypse Member since:

I'm running Vista on a dual core AMD64 3800+ and an integrated Radeon graphics card and it is not enough. It starts up fine but the usage is slow and even with 1GB of ram its still slower than it should be. In comparison Ubuntu runs faster if not comparably on a T42 laptop.

OSX runs rather well on our old 1st gen Mac Mini. It ran well with just 256MB of ram, with just a noticeable lag in application usage. You can't even use XP reasonably on 256MB of ram. Vista wouldn't even run on so little ram. Apple's success in this area has a lot to do with perception. The UI is smooth and makes up for a lot because eventhough the truth may be otherwise, the smoothness implies speed.

Vista is an okay, OS. It had a lot of potential, but over-ambition is its largest failing, imo. I think MS could benefit greatly from incremental releases, its a steady stream of revenue (only if the user actually want to upgrade) and Vista could have been a whole different beast if they had taken out incremental versions along the way.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Hey Quicks Draw
by akeru on Tue 30th Oct 2007 17:17 in reply to "RE: Hey Quicks Draw"
akeru Member since:

I take issue with the comment that Windows XP doesn't run well with 256MB of RAM. There's this popular misconception that Windows XP is extremely slow. This may be true if you install off the CD and leave it as-is, but with a bit of simple tweaking the OS is very fast. I've run XP on this laptop that had only 96MB of RAM, and while it wasn't a speed demon, it was faster than any other OS with the same level of usability/ease of use was on it. I used nLite to customize the install and get rid of all the stuff I didn't need, considerably tweaked services, and ran the classic interface.

Windows XP may have its fair share of issues, but speed isn't one of them.

Just to throw in there for fun, I have also installed Vista Ultimate (vLite/Tweaks) on this laptop after putting 512MB RAM into it. It installed and worked fine, just slowly.

Overall, I prefer to use Linux here, though this old hardware (Inspiron 5000/P3 600MHz) seems to be barely supported.

Edited 2007-10-30 17:23

Reply Parent Score: 1