Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 10/27/2007 9:55:15 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/7/2007 5:51:07 PM EDT by MEI2757935]
So who is using the new 10.5 OS?

What do you think? How was the install? Any problems? Overall, how is the performance of your computer compared to the 10.4 OS? Faster? Slower?

-MEI

Haters can FOAD. Stay out.
Link Posted: 10/27/2007 10:00:00 PM EDT

Originally Posted By MEI2757935:
So who is using the new 10.5 OS?

What do you think? How was the install? Any problems? Overall, how is the performance of your computer compared to the 10.4 OS? Faster? Slower?

-MEI

Haters can FOAD. Stay out.


I'm curious to know as well... a macbook may be in my future come tax return time
Link Posted: 10/27/2007 10:02:11 PM EDT
The guy at my local Mac store said not to bother getting it unless your buying a new Mac. Said it's not worth upgrading to.
Link Posted: 10/27/2007 10:02:12 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Btownboy:

Originally Posted By MEI2757935:
So who is using the new 10.5 OS?

What do you think? How was the install? Any problems? Overall, how is the performance of your computer compared to the 10.4 OS? Faster? Slower?

-MEI

Haters can FOAD. Stay out.


I'm curious to know as well... a macbook may be in my future come tax return time


Me three, but I ain't going there until at least 10.5.2 or .3 -- and when I find out what it broke.
Link Posted: 10/27/2007 10:03:29 PM EDT
I will be installing it tomorrow, will give some feedback tomorrow night.
Link Posted: 10/27/2007 10:04:10 PM EDT

Originally Posted By eodtech2000:
I will be installing it tomorrow, will give some feedback tomorrow night.


Yay something to look forward to reading! Thanks EOD
Link Posted: 10/27/2007 10:06:22 PM EDT

Originally Posted By eodtech2000:
I will be installing it tomorrow, will give some feedback tomorrow night.


Sounds good. I'll be patiently waiting.

-MEI
Link Posted: 10/27/2007 10:06:38 PM EDT

Originally Posted By eodtech2000:
I will be installing it tomorrow, will give some feedback tomorrow night.


OST for report, but we don't have a plans to upgrade anytime soon.
Link Posted: 10/27/2007 10:08:37 PM EDT
Installed it on a G5 powermac and Macbook Pro with no issues.
Link Posted: 10/27/2007 10:09:37 PM EDT

Originally Posted By mcgredo:
Installed it on a G5 powermac and Macbook Pro with no issues.


So what do you think? Like it? Worth the upgrade?

-MEI
Link Posted: 10/27/2007 10:14:32 PM EDT
Too early to say. It doesn't seem broken, anyway.
Link Posted: 10/28/2007 7:00:42 AM EDT
T-money's In-Depth Leopard Review:

IMHO, it's overpriced right now for what you get, at least for now. But I do have hope since a few official or aftermarket tweaks should help a lot. There are also many internal improvements that won't be visible until developers start making software specifically for 10.5.

If you mostly use the Apple i- applications, you will probably like the upgrade more than me. Look at the list of 300 improvements in Leopard and decide how many of them apply to you. Most of those 300 are really only improvements for programmers or the users of certain programs. I rarely or never use iChat, Safari, Automator, Xcode, Universal Access, or some of the others that have major upgrades with this release.

This review is based on a 2.0G Core2Duo Macbook with 1GB ram.

Look and Feel:
-Despite the hype, 10.5 itself does NOT seem faster than Tiger. Some actions (example: auto-hiding the Dock) are noticeably choppy. Certain programs may run fast, but I have not used it enough to say anything definite.
-Transparent menus are fine, the transparent Menu Bar is horrible. With a photo or patterned background, the menus are basically camouflaged. With a solid background, it is ugly and reduces contrast. With a window maximized to fill the screen, it looks silly and pointless.
-Dock: I changed this to the more Tiger-like 2D Dock asap. Once again, Apple doesn't even give you the option to change it in the Preferences. You can get the 2D Dock on the side, or 3D on the bottom, but that's it. Fortunately, it is very easy to do in Terminal.
-Some of the features (Menu Bar, Stacks, 3D Dock) look very cool in screen captures, but end up hurting usability. It only takes a few minutes of actual use to realize this. One reason many of use don't use Microsoft is because of Apple's better understanding of what makes a good interface. It's very troubling that Apple seems to choose a pretty interface over a good interface.

Spaces: My favorite part because it works well. I've started using this instead of constantly minimizing windows. Spaces lets me leave Firefox running and just slide back and forth to Mail or whatever else. If you use Expose or Alt-tab a lot, you'll probably like Spaces. The only way I would improve it is by allowing each Space to have a different background picture to make them easier to distinguish, but I can also understand keeping it Expose-like and just sliding windows around.

Quick Look: I also like this a lot. It's somewhere between a stripped down Preview and the Filmstrip view in Windows. Highlight an item and press the spacebar. It instantly pops open on the screen, no matter what type of file it is. It's great for looking through a bunch of similar documents. Use this for instantly reading documents along with the improved Preview for minor editing (resize photos, etc.).

Stacks: Huge disappointment. I'm one of those people that has a few constantly used applications in the Dock along with folders that I drill down into for everything else. Stacks ruins that.
-All folders dropped on the Dock automatically become Stacks, with no option to turn it off.
-You can't drill down into them - clicking a folder inside a stack just opens the ordinary finder window.
-The icon for the stack is the icon for the first item in the folder (it's actually a stack of icons, but all you see is the top one with some crap poking out around it) and you can't pick a custom icon. You can change which Icons is on top by changing the sort order, but that's it. So my Utilities stack is the icon for Activity Monitor. My Downloads stack is a picture of some random file I downloaded. Again, it looks cool in screen captures in reviews, but I would rather have a simple folder icon than a random icon for something else.

Front Row: Also a disappointment.
-It now uses almost the same (IMHO ugly) interface as AppleTV. If you didn't know, you would think this was an older, uglier Beta version of Front Row from 1999.
-There are more distracting visual elements (progress indicator bar is now bright blue) but the overall look is less interesting.
-That great opening transition with the desktop sliding back is gone, now it just fades to black. That was the one thing that always blew the minds of windows users. Now it just looks like any other media player program going to full screen mode.
-Music doesn't continue to play if you are browsing through other media types.
-It is quicker to open certain files and folders that were incredibly slow in the last version, and there is better integration with iTunes store previews, FWIW.
-I have a problem with video playback on an external display (aka my HDTV) but that seems to really be an early-version bug and not bad design.

Networking: Although networking was supposed to be greatly improved, I didn't see much.
-Fewer freezes if something gets disconnected. You can at least designate specific folders to share now. And shared folders on the network are more organized in Finder.
-It may be better if you have a bunch of Macs networked together. For the far more common scenario of a small home LAN with several windows PCs, it's still not as easy as it should be. Windows has had that Network Neighborhood thing for a decade, how hard could it be to make Macs plug in and work out of the box.

Time Machine: Have not set it up so no opinion. In the final release, they removed the option of using a networked/Airport connected drive for Time Machine (the only way that really makes sense if using a laptop that doesn't just sit on a desk).

Installation was very fast and easy. The Archive+Install option is highly recommended. Upgrade leaves a lot of incorrect Tiger options and use-permissions. Achive+Install restored my personal files and applications without any problems during installation.

Link Posted: 10/28/2007 7:08:46 AM EDT
I'm interested but I can't bring myself to pay a price near retail for it right now.
Link Posted: 10/28/2007 7:17:49 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/28/2007 7:19:25 AM EDT by macman37]
Does it require (or heavily suggest) wiping the hard drive first and installing the new OS clean?

I've done that before and it's a pain in the butt. I would rather not do all that work on my desktop workhorse dual G5, even with the routine backups to external hard drive that I do.

Edit: I just read the "Archive & Install" part someone wrote (sorry, forgot your name) ... At least that would mitigate the amount of work I've done in the past...
Link Posted: 10/28/2007 7:23:57 AM EDT

Originally Posted By macman37:
Does it require (or heavily suggest) wiping the hard drive first and installing the new OS clean?

I've done that before and it's a pain in the butt. I would rather not do all that work on my desktop workhorse dual G5, even with the routine backups to external hard drive that I do.

Edit: I just read the "Archive & Install" part someone wrote (sorry, forgot your name) ... At least that would mitigate the amount of work I've done in the past...


I've heard it said that Apple's system is much different than Microsoft's in that a fresh install is not really necessary. I think a lot of that is Windows' dependence on the ever-growing and uncleaned registry system.
Link Posted: 10/28/2007 7:30:33 AM EDT

Originally Posted By t-money:
T-money's In-Depth Leopard Review:

snip...



Thanks for your review. I welcome more if anyone has experience with Leopard.

-MEI
Link Posted: 10/28/2007 7:49:05 AM EDT
One of the coolest features no one is talking about?

Dashboard web clip. I now have live ammo prices from AIM and the surplus 223 from CTD just for laughs.

You can create a live web view of any websites page, so for ammo prices or whatever you want to view, it works great.



Link Posted: 10/28/2007 7:54:11 AM EDT

Originally Posted By macman37:
Does it require (or heavily suggest) wiping the hard drive first and installing the new OS clean?


No. I did in-place upgrades, and it kept all my old files, applications, and settings.
Link Posted: 10/28/2007 7:54:16 AM EDT

Originally Posted By gmill:
One of the coolest features no one is talking about?

Dashboard web clip. I now have live ammo prices from AIM and the surplus 223 from CTD just for laughs.

You can create a live web view of any websites page, so for ammo prices or whatever you want to view, it works great.

boyexplosive.com/leopard.jpg



Yeah I'm excited about this feature. I'll give it a try as soon as I personally own Leopard.

-MEI
Link Posted: 10/28/2007 7:57:47 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/28/2007 8:01:02 AM EDT by Max_Mike]
Well it does have one humorous new feature... the BSOD.

Keeping up with Windows is a bitch.

www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9044378&source=rss_news50


Some Leopard upgraders see 'blue screen of death'
Gregg Keizer

October 27, 2007 (Computerworld) Eds. note: The code at the end of this article has been changed since the article's initial appearance at computerworld.com.

A significant number of Mac owners upgrading to Leopard on Friday reported that after installing the new operating system, their machines locked up, showing only an interminable -- and very Windows-like -- "blue screen of death."

Easily the heaviest-trafficked thread on the Leopard support forums as of late Friday, "Installation appears stuck on a plain blue screen" told how after a successful Leopard install using the default "Upgrade" option and the required restart, some users' Macs refused to budge from the blue screen. Although many gave up after 30-60 minutes and rebooted, others were more patient and let their Macs be as long as six hours.

"Hmmmm. I feel like a windoze user now," said Doug Mcilvain. I have re-installed and it has been sitting there with a blue screen for 4 1/2 hours."

Almost everyone who added to the thread -- which included more than 200 messages and over 7,400 views by 10:30 p.m. Friday, Pacific time -- selected the Upgrade option. Set as the default, Upgrade is the least intrusive of the three install options. "Most of your existing settings and applications are left untouched during an upgrade," Apple states in an online support document. In fact, some reports speculated that the glitch might be related to a third-party program that installs a base-level framework that modified OS X.

Frustrated users who rebooted to the install DVD then upgraded a second time using the "Archive and Install" option reported success, and no lingering blue screen after restart. "I grew impatient after the first hour and rebooted to DVD and then reinstalled choosing the Archive/Install option," said volksapple. "That worked just fine. Despite this small hiccup, it's far better than any Windows upgrade I've suffered through."

Other users, however, waited it out, or were told to by Apple support personnel. One user, James Mitchell9, said the blue screen finally vanished at the 75-min. mark. Others claimed they had been told the long blue-screen-of-pause could last as long as two, or even three, hours.

Still others jumped in with instructions to manually uninstall APE (Application Enhancer), a framework created by Unsanity LLC for use with its Mac customizing haxies such as ShapeShifter. "Please note that this does involve manipulation of files from the root prompt," cautioned Chris Mcculloh, who first made the suggestion. "This is not for the faint of heart, or those who are unfamiliar with the UNIX file system/command structure."

Mcculloh listed the steps as:
Reboot into single-user mode (hold Command-S while booting)
Remove the following files by typing each line below:
rm -rf /Library/Preference Panes/Application Enhancer.prefpane
rm -rf /Library/Frameworks/Application Enhancer.framework
rm -rf /System/Library/SystemConfiguration/Application Enhancer.bundle
rm -rf /Library/Preferences/com.unsanity.ape.plist
Exit, to continue booting normally, type:
exit

For those who have not yet installed Leopard, the Unsanity APE app provides an uninstaller that can be used first to remove the framework before the new OS is installed. Alternatively, users can use the "archive and install" option, which places a new copy of Leopard on the user's computer while moving older OS files to another folder. That would have the effect of moving the potentially offending APE software to a location where it can do little to interfere with the installation process.

Apple was not available for comment Friday night, but an Australian user claimed support said the phones had been ringing "non-stop" over the problem since 9 a.m. local time. Australia was one of the first countries where Mac users got their hands on Leopard.

A few took the install screw-up in stride, or at least kept their sense of humor. "I don't remember seeing the option in setup under Installation Type that said 'Wait indefinitely while you stare at a blue screen and eventually go mad'," said Phill Horrocks1.
Link Posted: 10/28/2007 8:11:01 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Max_Mike:
Well it does have one humorous new feature... the BSOD.

Keeping up with Windows is a bitch.

www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9044378&source=rss_news50


Some Leopard upgraders see 'blue screen of death'
Gregg Keizer

October 27, 2007 (Computerworld) Eds. note: The code at the end of this article has been changed since the article's initial appearance at computerworld.com.

A significant number of Mac owners upgrading to Leopard on Friday reported that after installing the new operating system, their machines locked up, showing only an interminable -- and very Windows-like -- "blue screen of death."

Easily the heaviest-trafficked thread on the Leopard support forums as of late Friday, "Installation appears stuck on a plain blue screen" told how after a successful Leopard install using the default "Upgrade" option and the required restart, some users' Macs refused to budge from the blue screen. Although many gave up after 30-60 minutes and rebooted, others were more patient and let their Macs be as long as six hours.

"Hmmmm. I feel like a windoze user now," said Doug Mcilvain. I have re-installed and it has been sitting there with a blue screen for 4 1/2 hours."

Almost everyone who added to the thread -- which included more than 200 messages and over 7,400 views by 10:30 p.m. Friday, Pacific time -- selected the Upgrade option. Set as the default, Upgrade is the least intrusive of the three install options. "Most of your existing settings and applications are left untouched during an upgrade," Apple states in an online support document. In fact, some reports speculated that the glitch might be related to a third-party program that installs a base-level framework that modified OS X.

Frustrated users who rebooted to the install DVD then upgraded a second time using the "Archive and Install" option reported success, and no lingering blue screen after restart. "I grew impatient after the first hour and rebooted to DVD and then reinstalled choosing the Archive/Install option," said volksapple. "That worked just fine. Despite this small hiccup, it's far better than any Windows upgrade I've suffered through."

Other users, however, waited it out, or were told to by Apple support personnel. One user, James Mitchell9, said the blue screen finally vanished at the 75-min. mark. Others claimed they had been told the long blue-screen-of-pause could last as long as two, or even three, hours.

Still others jumped in with instructions to manually uninstall APE (Application Enhancer), a framework created by Unsanity LLC for use with its Mac customizing haxies such as ShapeShifter. "Please note that this does involve manipulation of files from the root prompt," cautioned Chris Mcculloh, who first made the suggestion. "This is not for the faint of heart, or those who are unfamiliar with the UNIX file system/command structure."

Mcculloh listed the steps as:
Reboot into single-user mode (hold Command-S while booting)
Remove the following files by typing each line below:
rm -rf /Library/Preference Panes/Application Enhancer.prefpane
rm -rf /Library/Frameworks/Application Enhancer.framework
rm -rf /System/Library/SystemConfiguration/Application Enhancer.bundle
rm -rf /Library/Preferences/com.unsanity.ape.plist
Exit, to continue booting normally, type:
exit

For those who have not yet installed Leopard, the Unsanity APE app provides an uninstaller that can be used first to remove the framework before the new OS is installed. Alternatively, users can use the "archive and install" option, which places a new copy of Leopard on the user's computer while moving older OS files to another folder. That would have the effect of moving the potentially offending APE software to a location where it can do little to interfere with the installation process.

Apple was not available for comment Friday night, but an Australian user claimed support said the phones had been ringing "non-stop" over the problem since 9 a.m. local time. Australia was one of the first countries where Mac users got their hands on Leopard.

A few took the install screw-up in stride, or at least kept their sense of humor. "I don't remember seeing the option in setup under Installation Type that said 'Wait indefinitely while you stare at a blue screen and eventually go mad'," said Phill Horrocks1.


This was on Slashdot, seems the people having issues with upgrading in place without doing a wipe had certain 3rd party Apps installed and those Apps are causing the issue. They do some modifications to the OS that Apple doesn't condone.

No different than some user putting certain applications on their Windows or Linux box then doing service pack upgrade or app upgrade and things suddenly going sour.
Link Posted: 10/28/2007 8:31:29 AM EDT

Originally Posted By mcgredo:

Originally Posted By macman37:
Does it require (or heavily suggest) wiping the hard drive first and installing the new OS clean?


No. I did in-place upgrades, and it kept all my old files, applications, and settings.


If you can muster a clean install, it is always better than a normal upgrade or even archive install.

If you have a tower, even more installation options.

I performed the normal upgrade on laptop, but for tower, purchased new 500gb seagate. Put new drive in 2nd internal drive bay. Clean install 10.5 on new drive and use migration assistant to import all applications/user settings from the old startup drive. Removed old startup drive and put in a new 750gb seagate. It's like a new computer, much faster than the original startup drive and all applications work great and have not had to re-install anything.

Best upgrade of OSX to date.
Link Posted: 10/28/2007 8:33:52 AM EDT

Originally Posted By gmill:
One of the coolest features no one is talking about?

Dashboard web clip. I now have live ammo prices from AIM and the surplus 223 from CTD just for laughs.

You can create a live web view of any websites page, so for ammo prices or whatever you want to view, it works great.

boyexplosive.com/leopard.jpg



What widget is that in the lower left - the system monitor?
Link Posted: 10/28/2007 8:41:54 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/28/2007 8:42:16 AM EDT by gmill]

Originally Posted By mmx1:

Originally Posted By gmill:
One of the coolest features no one is talking about?

Dashboard web clip. I now have live ammo prices from AIM and the surplus 223 from CTD just for laughs.

You can create a live web view of any websites page, so for ammo prices or whatever you want to view, it works great.

boyexplosive.com/leopard.jpg



What widget is that in the lower left - the system monitor?


istatpro

link
Link Posted: 10/28/2007 9:02:12 AM EDT

Originally Posted By gmill:

Originally Posted By mmx1:

Originally Posted By gmill:
One of the coolest features no one is talking about?

Dashboard web clip. I now have live ammo prices from AIM and the surplus 223 from CTD just for laughs.

You can create a live web view of any websites page, so for ammo prices or whatever you want to view, it works great.

boyexplosive.com/leopard.jpg



What widget is that in the lower left - the system monitor?


istatpro

link


Good one.
Link Posted: 10/29/2007 10:14:16 AM EDT

Originally Posted By MEI2757935:

Originally Posted By eodtech2000:
I will be installing it tomorrow, will give some feedback tomorrow night.


Sounds good. I'll be patiently waiting.

-MEI


My observations from a day of use:
1. 10.5 seems snappier than 10.4 Tiger on my Intel Macbook, Tiger wasn't fully optimized for Intel since Apple's switch over to Intel happened after the 10.4 release. Since I run OS X off a 5400 rpm laptop drive, I don't fully expect the speed of a normal PC internal hard drive.
2. Spaces is excellent, about time with the multiple desktops, something I have always liked about Linux.
3. The Stacks feature is cool, will have to play with this some more.
4. The Coverflow feature is outstanding
5. Timemachine is the real Gem, just need to get a ext. raid array and I will be truly in business with this feature.
6. Will need a little more time to get used to the other features that don't standout right off the bat.

TimeMachine snapshot

Link Posted: 10/29/2007 10:14:44 AM EDT
Page 2 ownage!

BigDozer66
Link Posted: 10/29/2007 11:16:08 AM EDT

Originally Posted By eodtech2000:

Originally Posted By MEI2757935:

Originally Posted By eodtech2000:
I will be installing it tomorrow, will give some feedback tomorrow night.


Sounds good. I'll be patiently waiting.

-MEI


My observations from a day of use:
1. 10.5 seems snappier than 10.4 Tiger on my Intel Macbook, Tiger wasn't fully optimized for Intel since Apple's switch over to Intel happened after the 10.4 release. Since I run OS X off a 5400 rpm laptop drive, I don't fully expect the speed of a normal PC internal hard drive.
2. Spaces is excellent, about time with the multiple desktops, something I have always liked about Linux.
3. The Stacks feature is cool, will have to play with this some more.
4. The Coverflow feature is outstanding
5. Timemachine is the real Gem, just need to get a ext. raid array and I will be truly in business with this feature.
6. Will need a little more time to get used to the other features that don't standout right off the bat.

TimeMachine snapshot

i228.photobucket.com/albums/ee46/eodtech2000/Picture1-1.png


Check out Drobo:
Link

Link Posted: 10/29/2007 1:11:38 PM EDT
Did a clean install, holding off on migrating user settings until I have a chance to play with it.

Feels quite slick so far.
Link Posted: 10/29/2007 3:00:12 PM EDT
Clean install on a brand new Macbook here. The install is less than an hour old, but I'm liking it. Strictly a toy for the near future though, everything I support is 10.4.

Pull the language files from the default install, save two gig.
Link Posted: 10/29/2007 4:56:17 PM EDT
Just wanted to give everyone a heads up.

The new widget web clip, I used it to track ammo prices from aimsurplus.com

It worked real well for the first 2 days.

Now Aim has apparently blocked my IP address from their website and the web clippings do not work
and I am now also banned from going to their website at all.

Hope this is not a problem for other sites.

I currently have ar15.com active topics as a web clip and it works great, you can watch live, the active topics
change via the widget.
Link Posted: 10/29/2007 5:00:35 PM EDT
I installed the developer tools, and it fucked up JDK 1.6. All the java JVM calls segfault. I've seen the fix for this before--they screwed it up on a tiger update, and it required re-optimizing some libs--but it's distressing that they screwed up something relatively basic.
Link Posted: 10/29/2007 9:53:11 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Extorris:
The guy at my local Mac store said not to bother getting it unless your buying a new Mac. Said it's not worth upgrading to.

Get that dork fired! It will be fine on any Intel machine, and should go well on a fast PPC. Maybe I'll install it on an external drive and see how my old 800MHz iMac G4 handles it... The specs say you need an 867MHz machine as a minimum...

And to t-money: I LMFAO! But then I guess some people just aren't cut out for the early-adopter lifestyle. Maybe you should get more RAM, 1 GB is kinda slim these days. I'll certainly agree with you on Stacks though. What a PITA.

I have a 2.33 GHz Core 2 Duo MacBook Pro with 2GB RAM. I backup, reformat, and install fresh for EVERY major upgrade. It avoids a lot of problems, especially if you do a lot of stupid stuff to the internals like I do

On the plus side, I got my IRC client(irssi) to compile a bit easier. glib is always a bitch to me, but it went smoother. Not to be outdone, Leopard pulled in another Perl bug just like Tiger did. Still waiting on a fix for that so I can recompile with Perl support. At least this time I didn't have to resort to fink or macports to install it.

OK, one big problem. It didn't transfer my email over properly, which meant I had to manually setup all the accounts again and import all my old email. Everything else went smoothly.
Link Posted: 10/29/2007 10:01:50 PM EDT
I installed 10.5 on my MBP (bought 9/28 so I got shafted on price) on Friday and I like it so far. As was said earlier, the iApps are nicer and I actually use them. Too early for me to really judge, but great thus far. Some things a lil choppy though.
Link Posted: 10/30/2007 7:43:11 AM EDT

Originally Posted By jrollins:

It will be fine on any Intel machine, and should go well on a fast PPC. Maybe I'll install it on an external drive and see how my old 800MHz iMac G4 handles it... The specs say you need an 867MHz machine as a minimum...




Let us know. I have a 12" 1.0ghz G4 Powerbook and don't know how it will handle Leopard.
Link Posted: 10/30/2007 7:46:16 AM EDT

Originally Posted By sovereign:

Originally Posted By jrollins:

It will be fine on any Intel machine, and should go well on a fast PPC. Maybe I'll install it on an external drive and see how my old 800MHz iMac G4 handles it... The specs say you need an 867MHz machine as a minimum...




Let us know. I have a 12" 1.0ghz G4 Powerbook and don't know how it will handle Leopard.


I have a 12" 867mhz G4 powerbook with 1.12GB RAM and I have upgraded the internal HD to a 7200rpm model.
I installed Leopard last week on it.
Leopard runs faster on it than 10.4 did.
Do a clean install and your all set.
Link Posted: 10/30/2007 7:56:42 AM EDT

Originally Posted By gmill:

Originally Posted By sovereign:

Originally Posted By jrollins:

It will be fine on any Intel machine, and should go well on a fast PPC. Maybe I'll install it on an external drive and see how my old 800MHz iMac G4 handles it... The specs say you need an 867MHz machine as a minimum...




Let us know. I have a 12" 1.0ghz G4 Powerbook and don't know how it will handle Leopard.


I have a 12" 867mhz G4 powerbook with 1.12GB RAM and I have upgraded the internal HD to a 7200rpm model.
I installed Leopard last week on it.
Leopard runs faster on it than 10.4 did.
Do a clean install and your all set.


Nice. I have 1.25GB of RAM with a 250GB 5400RPM HD (on the way) so it should work. Thanks.
Link Posted: 10/30/2007 8:08:39 AM EDT
I have installed it on two machines with no problems, although a third one, a mini mac, did not have enough ram to handle the upgrade. For me, the backup program Time Machine and Spaces are worth the price of admission. I am the house tech assistant and need to keep my wife's business backed up, something that she has a hard time remembering. I am hoping that Time Machine will be just the thing when it comes to saving our asses.

I guess I am not paying enough attention to system speed - I guess same speed if not a little faster.

Link Posted: 10/30/2007 8:53:40 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Tirador223:
I have installed it on two machines with no problems, although a third one, a mini mac, did not have enough ram to handle the upgrade. For me, the backup program Time Machine and Spaces are worth the price of admission. I am the house tech assistant and need to keep my wife's business backed up, something that she has a hard time remembering. I am hoping that Time Machine will be just the thing when it comes to saving our asses.

I guess I am not paying enough attention to system speed - I guess same speed if not a little faster.



I'm trying to play with Time Machine, but it's somewhat difficult with a laptop to keep an external plugged in constantly. That said, if it does what it says it does, it'll be a fine day indeed. I use Bru to back up a bunch of network servers, this would be far classier.
Link Posted: 10/30/2007 9:02:37 AM EDT

Originally Posted By WinstonSmith:

Originally Posted By Tirador223:
I have installed it on two machines with no problems, although a third one, a mini mac, did not have enough ram to handle the upgrade. For me, the backup program Time Machine and Spaces are worth the price of admission. I am the house tech assistant and need to keep my wife's business backed up, something that she has a hard time remembering. I am hoping that Time Machine will be just the thing when it comes to saving our asses.

I guess I am not paying enough attention to system speed - I guess same speed if not a little faster.



I'm trying to play with Time Machine, but it's somewhat difficult with a laptop to keep an external plugged in constantly. That said, if it does what it says it does, it'll be a fine day indeed. I use Bru to back up a bunch of network servers, this would be far classier.


IMHO, Time Machine needs a few extra features, maybe like advanced options. I would like for it in the advanced options give the user the ability to set the times you want your backup to start or after so much time of activity from the machine for it to start backups.
Link Posted: 11/7/2007 5:48:04 PM EDT
Well I finally bit the bullet and purchased Leopard. I installed it and ran into a few problems right away. I called tech support and apparently when I was running Tiger I was using the FileVault function which led to my problems. Apparently you need to shut off the FileVault feature before installing Leopard.

They got it worked out for me but I decided to do a complete format and fresh install.

Needless to say, I'm a lot happier now with my computers performance.

My machine is a MacBook Pro 2.33 GHz with 3 Gigs of DDR Ram.

Everything works great. I'm very happy with all the new features the Leopard OS provides. There isn't a whole lot of differences between Tiger and Leopard but it's worth the money.

So far, the only thing that hasn't worked was the automatic setup of my Gmail account. I fixed it, and now it works great.

I suggest the upgrade.

-MEI
Link Posted: 11/7/2007 5:55:13 PM EDT
I've been using it about a week and I like it a lot so far. Feels faster and more responsive than Tiger to me. Some of the preference panes have been redesigned for the better. Time Machine is a nice feature and seems to work well. The Cover Flow view is pretty cool for browsing a folder with media in it. I don't really use Spaces but it's nice to have.

The only thing I don't like is that there isn't any more fine-grained control of the firewall. They have changed it to be application-based so you just have to hope it's intelligent enough to pick up which ports your app might need inbound. So far i haven't run into a situation where I can't open a port (like for ssh) but it'd still be nice to specify it explicitly if I want to.
Link Posted: 11/7/2007 6:09:29 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/7/2007 6:52:54 PM EDT by sovereign]
1 week so far. 1ghz G4 12" Powerbook. I was concerned because my system is towards the bottom of the performance requirements, but have been impressed so far. The little 12" is running MUCH cooler than it was with Tiger, I don't think the fan has gone to its highest speed since the upgrade. Could have been something wrong with my Tiger setup, but I am religious about running Disk Utility to repair permissions, etc., especially before and after installing new apps/upgrades, etc. I replaced the internal prior to the install with a 250gb Western Digital and put the 160gb Seagate in an enclosure which I can boot from to run Office, Adobe photoshop, and Final Cut, etc. with Tiger. I am going to run the system clean until apps come out designed for Leopard. I've been reading of some problems with older apps migrating over from Tiger. I have had problems with Mail regarding sending through an IMAP stmp outgoing server.



Link Posted: 11/7/2007 6:09:39 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/5/2007 3:04:28 PM EDT by cruze5]
how many critical updates are there to install on this new version.


yes that is a serious question


a month later
Link Posted: 11/7/2007 6:15:31 PM EDT
I ordered it yesterday with another Barracuda drive specifically for Time Machine. My livelihood depends on keeping my files in tact and that feature alone was enough for me to buy. I'm stoked about Spaces too.
Link Posted: 11/7/2007 6:33:07 PM EDT
I'm still waiting for it to arrive on my doorstep courtesy of my corporate expense card

Life in IT is soo tough
Link Posted: 11/8/2007 3:57:04 AM EDT
Li'l snag..

I installed Leopard on a fresh Macbook, and imported user settings from my G4 iBook using the migration util.

If you're migrating from 10.4. to 10.5, do NOT include the network settings. I had a few locations set up with different configurations. That threw 10.5 for a serious loop. A few reboots and a blood sacrifice to Ganesha seems to have worked us through it, but it was touch and go there for a while.

Some older utilities aren't working on 10.5, though I'm not sure if it's more OS or processor. The Airport Client Monitor and Airport Management Utility specifically crash on load, but we're talking some old-ass software for some old-ass wireless units. Shame though, because the newest generation "Airport Utility" doesn't provide a lot of the functionality of the older apps.

We were speccing out 200gb 7200RPM SATA drives for beefing up some of the Macbooks. Intent was to run three partitions, 10.4, 10.5, XP. We'll see if that goes through.

My assesment at this point is that 10.5 is a neat OS with some cute new features. It's not as stable as 10.4 is though, and the features aren't absolute killers. I'll still be recommending 10.4 to neophytes, it's one of the most stable systems I've ever worked extensively on.
Link Posted: 12/5/2007 12:54:11 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/5/2007 12:55:17 PM EDT by Princeton]
A little off topic, but anybody upgrade to "Leopard" have a copy of "Tiger" laying around they'd like to part with?
I currently run Mac OS 10.2.8 & need to upgrade at least past 10.3 to run a program I have.

Link Posted: 12/5/2007 1:10:29 PM EDT
Someone ain't happy...

www.pcmag.com/print_article2/0,1217,a=220430,00.asp


Leopard is the New Vista, and It's Pissing Me Off
ARTICLE DATE: 11.29.07
By Oliver Rist

I'm not sure what ticks me off more about Leoptard (I can't take credit for that nickname—some Brit coined it): the fact that so many of the semi-important changes don't work, the fact that Apple turned a stable OS into a crash-happy glitz fest, or that the annoying, scruffy Live Free or Die Hard actor infecting my TV (and our Web site, by the way) is pretending that Leopard is better than Vista. It's not better than Vista. Leopard is Vista. And Tiger is better than both of them!

I had to be talked, wined, dined, and peer-pressured into buying my first MacBook Pro this past January. But once I plunked down the bucks for the slightly less hardware oomph per dollar than I'm used to, I was impressed by one thing: Everything. Just. Worked. Period.

Tiger just works. End of story.

But Apple marketing has the swinging pair of crabapples to actually print "Leopard Just Works" on its Web site. Hey, at least Microsoft
reps have the decency to look a little abashed when you point out their product's screwups. Apple reps just glare at you like they're daring you to say something. Well, I've got something to say. Several somethings.

XP Pro pre-SP1 crashed all the time, and Microsoft owned up to it—mostly. XP Pro post-SP2 crashed once in a while, and we sighed and kept working while Microsoft looked embarrassed and yelled at someone to work faster on SP3. From the start, Vista crashed noticeably less than XP Pro with SP2; it just doesn't work with 50 percent of new software—a year after its shrink-wrapped release. Cue the sound of teeth gnashing. But I digress. Here's the point, in case any Apple reps missed it: Microsoft has delivered clear improvements in stability over time—a feat you'd think Apple might want to emulate.

Let's see, Tiger crashed—oh yeah, NEVER. Ten months and I'm installing everything from production-level Office for the Mac 2004 to 0.x releases of VLC, Seashore, and Ecto—even betas of Firefox and Parallels. Whatever my nerdy little heart desires. I've had those early apps crash, but Tiger never faltered.

A month of using Leopard with the same software I had under Tiger and the OS has dumped six times. That's six cold reboots for Oliver. Apple isn't even honest enough to admit that Leopard is crashing: The OS just grays out my desktop and pops up a dialog box telling me I've got to reboot. Like the whole thing is my fault. I even snapped a picture of it. After all, I HAD PLENTY OF CHANCES! And all my complaints, mirrored by online forum traffic, are the same complaints I heard about Vista when it first reared its unbaked head.

Leopard is the new Vista. All the way. And here are five examples.

Vista Similarity 1: Wait for a Service Pack—Perpetually

Even our own reviewer, who loves Leopard, says not to upgrade until 10.5.1. And now that Apple has coughed that up, he'll probably say to wait for 10.5.2. Or .3. Now where have I heard that advice before? Oh yeah, every time I reviewed Vista.

What makes it worse is this convoluted argument that my Apple friends give me: They're more upset at Microsoft on account of it being in perpetual service pack limbo because Vista was supposed to be a ground-up redesign, whereas Leopard is really just a juicy point release. That makes zero sense to me. As far as I'm concerned, they both suck.

Vista's ground-uppedness wasn't nearly as major a landmark as I was expecting—aside from massive and continuous software and hardware incompatibilities. Leopard is touting many of the same "new" features, including the vaunted 64-bittedness. Vista took five years and lost a whole bunch of features along the way, so the fact that it's still unbaked after half a decade blows my mind.

No one is 100 percent sure how long Leopard took, since Apple whispered its name only just last year, but if it is "just a point release," then it should have been much easier to Q/A. And yet, it's still unbaked despite an ad campaign that implies it's fresh, steaming, just out of the oven, and delicious.

Vista Similarity 2: Needless Graphics Glitz

Then there's the new look. Vista comes out and we're all wondering, what was the big deal about window transparency? Yeah, it's great that the OS can support bigger, better video, but unless I'm seeing it as part of a game or an actual productivity app, I just don't care. Looking down to the bottom of my desktop as if I'm snorkeling in a clear blue Bahamas lagoon doesn't really do anything for me. Everyone agrees, and Vista's Aero gets nuked as just another example of Microsoft being in bed with hardware vendors, forcing all of us to run out and upgrade hardware—video cards, in this case.

Poof, here's Leopard, and the first thing the Apple folks want to show me is window transparency. Now all of a sudden that's the coolest thing ever and an obvious example of cutting-edge OS evolution. I had to check to make sure my ears were working when I heard that one.


Vista Similarity 3: Pointless User Interface "Fixes"

Then there's how Microsoft screwed up Vista's UI, reorganizing things that didn't need to be reorganized—like the networking screens, for example. Under XP you can get to those with a single right-click on the desktop. Under Vista, it's three layers down for no good reason. Or those new Save As dialog boxes. Drunken monkeys could figure out what was going on under the XP format, but under Vista I've got users asking me for help—and this is at PC Magazine Labs!

Not to be left behind, Apple has messed up its own UI, too, but Apple did it with piles of senseless graphics enhancements. Users either have to deal with these or learn some nasty hack to kill them off. So much for ease of use.

Who's responsible for Apple's redesigned dock? I could understand a programmer thinking a mirrored dock would look great on his résumé. But I can't imagine that a UI expert looked at it and said it was more functional than Tiger's. A stupid cornflower-blue fuzzball is no replacement for Tiger's clear, dark arrow that let me know what apps I had open. I could actually see the arrow. The blue fuzzy thing just blends in with the pointless mirrored reflections of the app icons, so now I've got to squint for the same information.

Okay, Cover Flow I like, but at any normal resolution that's about as much preview capability as I need. So why add that two-clicks-down QuickLook deal? And what's with that curving Stacker thing off of docked folders? Any subfolder takes you back to Finder anyway, so why not just start there? Oh, wait, I'm forgetting about the new folder icons with the barely visible and nonintuitive subject tattoos on them. And the pièce de résistance: rounded corners on menu bars! Awesome. I have so been waiting for those!

Vista Similarity 4: Nuked Networking

Microsoft made a big deal out of Vista's completely redesigned TCP/IP networking stack, with a big part specifically intended to make wireless networking easier and more stable. And the OS did that fine. Only problem is, now wired networking tends to drop mysteriously every once in a while. But, hey, that's what SP1 is for, right? (Yeah, that was sarcasm.) At least Microsoft had a good reason to mess with its networking stack: XP's networking was a fiery offense against man and nature. What's Apple's excuse?

I actually don't know. Yeah, I know the OS went to full-on 64-bits, but that's no reason to mess with the networking stack. Especially since Tiger's networking just plain worked. Plug into an Apple network—you're good to go. Plug into a Windows network—you're good to go. Plug into any IP-based mixed-client network—you're good to go. Bring up a new Windows share in a mixed network, and Tiger usually sees it before the Windows client does. Did someone actually sit down and say, we've just got to improve on that?

Leopard's networking sees the physical part of the network just fine, wired or wireless. And if there's an AFP share, that pops up like a puppy for a doggie treat. But the Web abounds in complaints—plaintive cries as to why Leopard seems to ignore Windows shares, and semi-effectual fixes. Or it sees Windows shares for a little while and then in a fit of pique decides to drop them again. It's like the French waiter of networking. Oh, but who cares, Oliver? After all, it's not as if networking were in any way related to business functionality. Or that interacting peaceably with Windows is in any way required. As long as we can talk to the iPod and Apple TV we're good, right?

Vista Similarity 5: Bundled Apps as New Features That Suck

This drives me nuts. With Vista, it was SideShow. Not Sidebar, which is the annoying and semifunctional widget Microsoft copied into Vista because it just couldn't let Google and Yahoo! hog all the kudos. Sidebar is a decent example of a New Feature That Sucks, but SideShow is a great example. SideShow is that promised hardware-bundle feature that would let users scan e-mail, play music, and perform similar functions on a notebook or PDA-style Vista PC without opening or booting the computer (this requires a little screen on the notebook lid with some nav buttons). I saw a bad implementation on the much-cursed FlipStart mini PC, and there's a Dell notebook around now that has it, but on both it was essentially a non-feature.

For Leopard, the sad bundled app-as-feature is Time Machine. To hear Mac moonies tell it, this is the best thing to happen to backup since the letter b. In reality, however, it sucketh and it sucketh huge.

Okay, the screen looks like Star Wars. That's cool in an I-want-to-stay-a-virgin kind of way. But "easy to use"? Which groupie said that? Try putting a new Apple user in front of this app and see what happens. For one, you can't set up Time Machine from within Time Machine. How is that easy? You'll find some of the settings buried in System Settings and others in Time Machine. And if you want to kick off a manual backup, you've got to know to right-click on the Time Machine icon in the dock. Is Britney Spears moonlighting as Apple's UI designer?

Then there's the annoying marketing ploy showcasing how amazing it is that Time Machine takes a snapshot of the entire file system. News flash: EVERY backup app can take a snapshot of the entire file system. That would be the reason we call them "backup programs." Other backup apps simply tell you to choose which files and folders you want saved—up to and including the entire file system. Time Machine does it the other way around and says "I'm backing up everything unless you tell me otherwise." How is this better than, say, Vista's bundled backup?

In fact, Vista's backup kicks Time Machine's butt in three rather important ways: First, you can do an image-based bare-metal restore with the MS version—provided you've paid for the privilege by buying a more expensive version of Vista. (See, being able to do a bare-metal restore makes losing all that drive space that you eat by taking a full-system snapshot worthwhile.) Time Machine needs a working version of Leopard to talk to, so why am I backing up all that system stuff?

Second, Vista does block-level incremental backups to help conserve drive space and decrease backup time. With this type of backup, a previously backed-up file that's been recently changed has only the new changes saved and the rest of the file referenced. Time Machine doesn't do that at the file level. You change a file and it just snaps the whole thing again. Not such a big deal for Word docs, but for my Entourage mail database? My Fedora or Vista virtual machine files? That's a lot of data to just keep snapping away at.

So why doesn't Time Machine do block-level backups? I have no idea. Apple controls the file system. It controls the backup application. Generally, that's all you need. Maybe Apple couldn't spare the programmers working on the hugely important Star Wars core animation splash-screen project. Can't skimp on that, can we?

Third, Vista's backup works over a network. In its ads Apple blithely says that Time Machine can, too, but when you read the fine print—or try it in real life—you discover that Time Machine works with USB- or FireWire-connected drives only. Really? In 2007? When I saw that, I actually looked around to see if Ashton Kutcher was going to pop out from behind my lab bench and tell me I'd been punked.

Meanwhile, maybe I'm a boring old sys admin guy, but EMC's Retrospect worked just fine under Tiger, and some version of that app comes free with any number of networked hard drives or home NAS products. No Star Wars splash screen, though—just easy-to-navigate wizards, damn them.

Okay, I probably had a little too much coffee this morning, but Leopard really is just one big popped balloon of disappointment. Let's get it straight, however: I'm not any more against Leopard than I am against Vista. Both of them got too much wrong. I'll close with a little tidbit for that pudgy PC guy in the Apple commercials who's so sad because his users are "downgrading" to XP. Well, maybe they are—I know I did. But I'm writing this on an XP workstation right now because my Mac is busy reinstalling Tiger. Leopard can keep its glitzy crash-prone spots. I'll stick with the OS that really "just works"—for now.
Link Posted: 12/5/2007 1:34:23 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Princeton:
A little off topic, but anybody upgrade to "Leopard" have a copy of "Tiger" laying around they'd like to part with?
I currently run Mac OS 10.2.8 & need to upgrade at least past 10.3 to run a program I have.



IM me a snail mail addy and your machine specifications.

Sounds like you have the right idea though, I'd skip 10.3 and go right to 10.4.9 or so (but not past there, seen some problems with 10.4.11, heard of some problems with 10.4.10).
Link Posted: 12/5/2007 1:36:06 PM EDT

Originally Posted By frogwater:
I ordered it yesterday with another Barracuda drive specifically for Time Machine. My livelihood depends on keeping my files in tact and that feature alone was enough for me to buy. I'm stoked about Spaces too.


If your livelihood DEPENDS on it, I'd do manual backups to DVD or CD as well, and keep them offsite.

The lightning strike that takes out your desktop can take out your backup drive too, no matter how many surge protectors and UPS systems you use.
Top Top