OSNews

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! :-)

Well in your post I find traces of Open Source Zealotry meaning nothing that Apple can do to make you like the product, but for other people the fact that it is Open Source it is not always a big plus, GNU is getting more string attached while Apple stays consistent with their rules which a lot more people much rather have a consistency then changing rules...
That being said... As for Leopard being a 10 I would disagree There are issues with it. But just have recently put Vista on Parallels I can say Leopard is better then Vista by a huge scale. Also being that Vista is about a year out in the public it is still having a lot more problems then Leopard has. But Leopard is not a 10 there are still a lot of glitches that need to be worked out Normally most of the major ones will be cleaned out in 3-4 months.

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.

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.

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

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.



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).