** The Official Mac OS X Leopard First Impressions and Review Thread **

Dr Jones said:
Just so you know, the "Blue Screen" is not Hardware fault.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=375444
It is due to software conflict (and happens when "upgrading")
Click to expand...
I never said it was a hardware fault, in fact I mentioned that it's a software problem despite Apple owning both the software AND the hardware and only having to produce an OS for a known platform and small range of hardware they control. And yet still there are a significant number blue screen problems...

Dr Jones said:
Sticking to the point of upgrading, what do you mean leopard by default is an upgrade due to the fact that the installer gives you an option as "upgrade"?

Rather shallow of an argument IMO; the fact Apple put it as "upgrade" is because it's possible for the OS install to write over all system files whilst retaining Apps, settings e.t.c. - an install over existing OS, quite akin to Windows 95 to Windows 98 type of "upgrade"
Click to expand...
Sorry I really don't follow you point. Leopard IS an upgade because

A) You wouldn't have a Mac with no OS so it's an upgrade to whatever OS was on the machine previously. How many Macs do you have that you have installed Leopard on that have never had an OS on them?

B) The Leopard install itself refers to the default option as being an "upgrade".

You believe that is shallow reasoning for 10.5 being in effect an upgrade? The OP told me Leopard was not an upgrade and that's why Vista upgrade should not be compared to it price wise. I contend Leopard is realistically an upgrade whether it says that on the box or not. I can only assume you are confused!??

Dr Jones said:
AFAIK, Apple has been doing this type of "Upgrade" on OS X - each advancing along. It is also no big secret that Leopard is more of a Developers "upgrade" than end users 300 new killer apps/features.
Click to expand...
eh? I thought you said it wasn't an upgrade :confused:

Dr Jones said:
I'm still reserving my end judgement of Leopard but as it stands, £58 for this upgrade is worth it - runs much much faster than Tiger is one thing, Time Machine is a blessing, Spaces (coupled with Parallels and Expose) is wonderful:) and I'm still exploring around...
Click to expand...
So if you took time to stop being defensive (lol at EVH in full on Jobs fanboy mode) you'd realise I was having a fun dig at 10.5 in general because almost every criticism leveled at Vista by Mac users when it was released can pretty much be leveled at Leopard now.

It's seems so far to be OK and an improvement in some areas over Tiger but it's late, underwhelming, has fundamental install problems for a lot of users, has few truely useful innovations, repackages stuff done on other OS, still lags behind in areas and for someone who has been using Tiger for a long time actually adds few tangible advantages that inprove the day to day experience and productivity. Sure stuff like spaces is usefull but lets face it virtual desktops are hardly innovative, it's been around on Linux & Unix and even, (although granted less successfully) on MS OS for years. Spaces and a fluffy UI update are hardly reason for Jobs to regard it as the pinnacle of OS development.

There's a reason Leopard is V10.5 and not V11...
 
Last edited:
Slogan said:
I can't help but feel Vista's nightmare start to its life (and it's a decent operating system before anyone starts) has prompted a little jealousy or frustration...
Click to expand...
Not at all, just pointing out how almost all the criticisms mac users leveled at Vista and it's "nightmare" start seem very similar to things that can be said about mac users latest incarnation of OSX at launch.

Of course I don't expect anyone who makes a concious decision to invest in a slow, expensive and largely incompatible hardware and software platform for anything other than publishing and some music to accept any negative comments about Jobs latest smoke and mirrors act ;)











*Just kidding with ya.... this is a sense of humour moment :D
 
Athanor said:
I never said it was a hardware fault, in fact I mentioned that it's a software problem despite Apple owning both the software AND the hardware and only having to produce an OS for a known platform and small range of hardware they control. And yet still there are a significant number blue screen problems...
Click to expand...

Did you even read the link? The software fault was a 3rd party - that can be installed without user's knowledge (i.e. logitech mouse)
 
Athanor said:
There's a reason Leopard is V10.5 and not V11...
Click to expand...

The blue screen is caused by third party software that hacks the OS. How can Apple be at fault for this? If people run hacks and do an upgrade then they should expect trouble...

Oh and OS XI will arrive but not for a while. 10.5 is a complete update of 10.4 the same way that 10.4 was from 10.3

Are you trolling because it seems that way to me.

OS X has its flaws but compared to Windows it is in a different league. Unix stability and security + ease of use = win for most users (i.e. people who want to get stuff done). Only geeks who want to tinker or gamers complain. They are welcome to run Linux or buy an Xbox! :p
 
Dr Jones said:
Did you even read the link? The software fault was a 3rd party - that can be installed without user's knowledge (i.e. logitech mouse)
Click to expand...
I know, much the same as when Windows blue screens from third party software or drivers, doesn't stop the mac brigade declaring Windows as rubbish....
 
LordSplodge said:
The blue screen is caused by third party software that hacks the OS. How can Apple be at fault for this? If people run hacks and do an upgrade then they should expect trouble...
Click to expand...
see above reply

LordSplodge said:
Oh and OS XI will arrive but not for a while. 10.5 is a complete update of 10.4 the same way that 10.4 was from 10.3
Click to expand...
Sorry, don't get you. I pointed out 10.5 was only a point release for a reason, i.e. it's not a particularly big step forward. No one ever said OS11, 12 and 43 won't get trotted out by Jobs to secure more of the faithfulls $ at some point.

LordSplodge said:
Are you trolling because it seems that way to me.
Click to expand...
Presumably because you regard anyone mentioning a Mac OS not being perfect as trolling. I notice you don't actually dispute or debate the facts on anything i've said. Nor indeed have you argued that a lot of the criticism you choose to level at a Windows OS and Vista in particular aren't justifiably able to be mentioned about 10.5 at the moment.

LordSplodge said:
OS X has its flaws but compared to Windows it is in a different league. Unix stability and security + ease of use = win for most users (i.e. people who want to get stuff done). Only geeks who want to tinker or gamers complain. They are welcome to run Linux or buy an Xbox! :p
Click to expand...
Spoken like a true fanboy...
 
LordSplodge said:
On a purely technical level as far as Operating Systems go Windows is rubbish! :p :D
Click to expand...
Stop it, stop it, it's silly :D ;)

Anyway, have fun with the new OS chaps, just thought i'd draw some parallels and indulge in some friendly banter on a sunday evening...
 
Last edited:
Splodge, do you want to back up any of your claims at any point? Saying "Windows is rubbish!" doesn't really help discussion. You can't make accusations of trolling and then make blanket statements with no grounding in truth.

Surely if Mac OS X was in a totally different league to Windows in every way including security, all the places for whom security was important (for example, banks, the government etc) would run it on their desktops? I mean you portray it as a no-brain decision to use a Mac for everything, so why is everyone still buying Windows boxes?
 
Do-not-feed-the-troll.PNG


But while I'm here, Leopard is a full OS release. You can do an install on a blank disk, so it's a full release and as such (legally at least) is best compared to a full copy of vista.
 
Caged said:
Splodge, do you want to back up any of your claims at any point? Saying "Windows is rubbish!" doesn't really help discussion. You can't make accusations of trolling and then make blanket statements with no grounding in truth.

Surely if Mac OS X was in a totally different league to Windows in every way including security, all the places for whom security was important (for example, banks, the government etc) would run it on their desktops? I mean you portray it as a no-brain decision to use a Mac for everything, so why is everyone still buying Windows boxes?
Click to expand...

Because its what the public use?

I've used both Windows and Mac OS since I was 6.

Mac OS has always been the better system.


From everything from Web Browsing to doing video work.

I love my PM G4 and as it nears its 5th Birthday, its being retired.

If Windows was as good as OS X then I wouldn't have spent £1600 on a MacBook Pro, but as it is, I got one.

Long live OS X :D
 
I've been using Firefox since Windows and then switched to Opera - which is very very feature full and since Leopard, I tried Safari properly and since have a linking for it. (Right click) Dictionary when reading medical journals on it is useful :)
 
But while I'm here, Leopard is a full OS release. You can do an install on a blank disk, so it's a full release
Click to expand...

So can a Windows XP upgrade (I realise they changed it for Vista) - but that does rather stop your argument from making any sense at all. Whether you install Leopard on a blank disk or not, it's only ever being installed (legally) on Apple hardware which had to be bought with a licensed version of the operating system. So as far as the pricing goes you're in a situation where, if you were a Windows user, you'd only have to buy the upgrade version. You can't compare the pricing to the full retail version of Windows when Apple have already included the cost of the operating system in the cost of the hardware.
 
Caged said:
Splodge, do you want to back up any of your claims at any point? Saying "Windows is rubbish!" doesn't really help discussion. You can't make accusations of trolling and then make blanket statements with no grounding in truth.

Surely if Mac OS X was in a totally different league to Windows in every way including security, all the places for whom security was important (for example, banks, the government etc) would run it on their desktops? I mean you portray it as a no-brain decision to use a Mac for everything, so why is everyone still buying Windows boxes?
Click to expand...

One of the major problems with Windows is the way applications hook into to underlying OS. You have numerous different ways that you can access the core OS and not only that but you have pretty much unlimited access to the protected parts of the kernel. Combine these two and any badly coded application can bring the OS to its knees. OS X only allows applications to communicate via the provided frameworks and because of the UNIX kernel it is very difficult to access areas you are not supposed to...

A classic example of this is how an application can crash explorer and you cannot end the task or restart explorer. On the rare occasion that an application stops Finder from working you can 99% of the time restart Finder as it is a totally separate application from the kernel.

Then you have the code. Windows (even Vista)) is carrying extra code from previous versions of Windows. Microsoft could have re-written Windows from the ground up but never did so you have a massive amount of code that has a high likelihood of bugs due to the vast amount of code.

There are lots of technical reasons why OS X is better than Windows and a good Google will show you as my poor brain isn't on top form as I am not too well...

The reason I think OS X is a far superior operating system over Windows is the fact that it is a fully UNIX Certified kernel so provides the proper functions needed for the core of an operating system but unlike UNIX and Linux has one of the easiest to use GUIs. Your average user just wants to get their work done and this is what OS X does better than Windows.

Most of the world runs Windows because most of the bespoke applications are on Windows. It's about market share. Banks are not going to use OS X because they can use their custom applications (that are mostly front ends onto a UNIX mainframe) - it's like the old saying "Nobody got fired for buying IBM" well that equates nowadays to "nobody gets fired for buying Windows"

QNX is a far better operating system than Windows and one of the few in the world that can handle real time process handling but you don't see that in every office do you? But you sure as hell want it running on your heart rate monitor!!!

Oh and it's LordSplodge to you! :p :D
 
PinkPig said:
So can a Windows XP upgrade (I realise they changed it for Vista) - but that does rather stop your argument from making any sense at all. Whether you install Leopard on a blank disk or not, it's only ever being installed (legally) on Apple hardware which had to be bought with a licensed version of the operating system. So as far as the pricing goes you're in a situation where, if you were a Windows user, you'd only have to buy the upgrade version. You can't compare the pricing to the full retail version of Windows when Apple have already included the cost of the operating system in the cost of the hardware.
Click to expand...
Thank you PP, my point entirely although somewhat more eloquently put... :)
 
Athanor said:
Tut, tut, there's more....

Leopard may have 300 new features, but it is unable to run Java 1.6, even though that same version is available for both Windows and Linux.

http://www.regdeveloper.co.uk/2007/10/29/no_java_for_leopard/

;)
Click to expand...

It's in the pipeline, and will be released as an update as it was with Tiger; I don't see the issue.. they never claimed it would be a launch item.

I don't know why you insist on posting stuff that's obviously going to cause a riot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom