Anybody Else Thinking About Just Skipping Leopard?

Discussion in 'Apple' started by Nelson, Jan 31, 2009.

  1. Nelson

    Nelson Guest

    Tiger works just fine for me and I have been procrastinating upgrading
    not wanting to deal with all the version incompatibilities with
    software I already have. And the new permission structure sounds like
    an added headache, especially if you don't do a clean install. Plus I
    really can't find any compelling new features. It just looks like
    bloat. I felt the same way about Spotlight and Widgets prior to
    upgrading to Leopard and my opinion has not changed. Maybe I'll just
    wait for "Snow Leopard" and save myself the hassle of two upgrades.

    --
    Nelson
     
    Nelson, Jan 31, 2009
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Nelson <> writes:

    >Tiger works just fine for me and I have been procrastinating upgrading
    >not wanting to deal with all the version incompatibilities with
    >software I already have. And the new permission structure sounds like
    >an added headache, especially if you don't do a clean install. Plus I
    >really can't find any compelling new features. It just looks like
    >bloat. I felt the same way about Spotlight and Widgets prior to
    >upgrading to Leopard and my opinion has not changed. Maybe I'll just
    >wait for "Snow Leopard" and save myself the hassle of two upgrades.


    Frankly, at this point, unless there is some compelling applicaiton
    or feature, I'd wait as well. I upgraded ages ago, but having waited
    this long, it's most likely in your best interests to wait for the
    next release.

    -Stephen
    --
    Stephen Adams
    (rot13)
     
    Stephen Adams, Jan 31, 2009
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Nelson

    Tim McNamara Guest

    In article <>,
    Nelson <> wrote:

    > Tiger works just fine for me and I have been procrastinating
    > upgrading not wanting to deal with all the version incompatibilities
    > with software I already have. And the new permission structure
    > sounds like an added headache, especially if you don't do a clean
    > install. Plus I really can't find any compelling new features. It
    > just looks like bloat. I felt the same way about Spotlight and
    > Widgets prior to upgrading to Leopard and my opinion has not changed.
    > Maybe I'll just wait for "Snow Leopard" and save myself the hassle of
    > two upgrades.


    Spotlight is handy and was the single most useful thing that I found in
    "upgrading" to 10.4. I've not upgraded to 10.5 as there is nothing
    compelling there for me. I'll look at 10.6 but since I own an iBook G4
    it is possible I won't be able to upgrade to it. That's OK, 10.4 works
    very well for me.
     
    Tim McNamara, Jan 31, 2009
    #3
  4. Nelson <> writes:

    > Tiger works just fine for me and I have been procrastinating upgrading
    > not wanting to deal with all the version incompatibilities with
    > software I already have. And the new permission structure sounds like
    > an added headache, especially if you don't do a clean install. Plus I
    > really can't find any compelling new features. It just looks like
    > bloat. I felt the same way about Spotlight and Widgets prior to
    > upgrading to Leopard and my opinion has not changed. Maybe I'll just
    > wait for "Snow Leopard" and save myself the hassle of two upgrades.


    If you are happy with things, it is hard to argue with leaving them
    alone.

    I did ugrades, not clean install, and found that experience completely
    painless. And I had not version incompatibilities with the third
    party software I use (but it is all open-source except for MS OFfice).

    I agree with you about widgets, but Spotlight has occasionally been
    useful to me. As far as Leopard's new features, there are three
    features at the user level that I find very good.

    - Time Machine is a good way to handle backups, especially if you
    don't already have a way that you like. It made my life easier when
    my hard drive on my MacBook died with no warning.

    - Spaces. I've been waiting for this since I first started using Os
    X (having come to it from X11 where a similar feature is
    commonplace).

    - Screen Sharing.

    These are the things that make Leopard worthwhile for me. (I'm also
    very curious about iPhoto 9's face recognition, but I haven't made
    that purchase.)

    What I've heard about the next thing (Snow Leopard) is that it is
    mostly streamlining for intel based machines. If that turns out to be
    true, and you are still happy with Tiger, you may want to wait for the
    iteration _after_ Snow Leopard!
     
    Doug Anderson, Jan 31, 2009
    #4
  5. In article <>,
    Nelson <> wrote:

    > Maybe I'll just wait for "Snow Leopard" and save myself the hassle of
    > two upgrades.


    Considering that Snow Leopard is supposedly due out within the next four
    or five months or so, that's a good idea.

    I wonder whether Apple will (for the first time) have two versions (at
    two price points) of Snow Leopard, one as an upgrade for Leopard (lower
    price point) and one as a full install for those who have earlier
    versions of Mac OS X installed.

    --
    It's now time for healing, and for fixing the damage the GOP did to America.
     
    Michelle Steiner, Jan 31, 2009
    #5
  6. Nelson

    Marc Heusser Guest

    In article <>,
    Nelson <> wrote:

    > Tiger works just fine for me and I have been procrastinating upgrading
    > not wanting to deal with all the version incompatibilities with
    > software I already have. And the new permission structure sounds like
    > an added headache, especially if you don't do a clean install. Plus I
    > really can't find any compelling new features. It just looks like
    > bloat. I felt the same way about Spotlight and Widgets prior to
    > upgrading to Leopard and my opinion has not changed. Maybe I'll just
    > wait for "Snow Leopard" and save myself the hassle of two upgrades.


    If you need/want iLife'09 and iWork'09 you get Leopard almost for free
    with the Mac Box set.
    Leopard works better than Tiger (without bloat!).
    I even have a family pack of Leopard I could sell.

    YMMV

    Marc

    --
    remove bye and from mercial to get valid e-mail
    <http://www.heusser.com>
     
    Marc Heusser, Jan 31, 2009
    #6
  7. Nelson

    Wes Groleau Guest

    Marc Heusser wrote:
    > I even have a family pack of Leopard I could sell.


    Please name a price, here or by e-mail.
    Thanks

    --
    Wes Groleau

    "Thinking I'm dumb gives people something to
    feel smug about. Why should I disillusion them?"
    -- Charles Wallace
    (in _A_Wrinkle_In_Time_)
     
    Wes Groleau, Jan 31, 2009
    #7
  8. Nelson

    Kevin K Guest

    On Sat, 31 Jan 2009 20:57:09 UTC, (Mike
    Rosenberg) wrote:

    > Nelson <> wrote:
    >
    > > Maybe I'll just
    > > wait for "Snow Leopard" and save myself the hassle of two upgrades.

    >
    > I'm surprised no one has brought this up before, but you didn't specify
    > which Mac you have, and unless it has an Intel processor, don't assume
    > you can run Snow Leopard on it.
    >



    I bought a G4 Mini before we knew there were going to be Intel based
    systems, as a way to find out if a Mac was worth having. Liked it
    enough as a secondary system that, when I decided to upgrade from my
    primary Windows system, I just went to the Mac Pro.

    Unfortunately I won't just be able to upgrade both systems to the Snow
    Leopard when it comes out, so I will either have to buy an upgrade to
    Leopard for the old one, or just leave it at Tiger. I'll probably
    upgrade my Pro.

    What burns with me is that, with the form factor of the Mini, that
    Netflix's support for the Mac uses Silverlight, which isn't supported
    on the PPC. I would have liked to be able to watch instant watch on
    my television.
     
    Kevin K, Jan 31, 2009
    #8
  9. Nelson

    Nelson Guest


    > On Sat, 31 Jan 2009 20:57:09 UTC, (Mike
    > Rosenberg) wrote:
    >
    >> Nelson <> wrote:
    >>
    >>> Maybe I'll just
    >>> wait for "Snow Leopard" and save myself the hassle of two upgrades.

    >>
    >> I'm surprised no one has brought this up before, but you didn't specify
    >> which Mac you have, and unless it has an Intel processor, don't assume
    >> you can run Snow Leopard on it.


    Interesting point. Has Apple said it won't support the G4 or just not
    said that it would?


    --
    Nelson
     
    Nelson, Jan 31, 2009
    #9
  10. Nelson

    AES Guest

    In article <310120090839416900%>,
    sbt <> wrote:

    > Everyone has different priorities and finds different features
    > compelling, so without a better knowledge of for what you use your Mac
    > and how you accomplish your tasks, I can't really answer the question
    > for you; however, I can give a little personal perspective on my own
    > situation and that of friends and family members.
    >
    > 1: Time Machine-I use it, but I already had a backup system in place
    >
    > 2: QuickLook-When I first saw/heard of QuickLook, I considered it
    >
    > 3: Spaces-I expected Spaces to be a major part of my workflow, but
    >
    > 4: Xcode-Xcode 3.1.1 in Leopard is much improved over Tiger's Xcode
    >
    > 5: iChat-If you use iChat, the Leopard version is more solid and more
    >
    > 6: Mail-If you manage your email with Apple's Mail program, the Leopard
    >
    > The list goes on, but that should give you some anecdotal info with
    > which to work.


    Thank you for these comments. I think you've convinced this reader (not
    the OP) that I'll be one of those who will just never bother with
    Leopard.

    (And if it really kills Eudora, I may never bother with Snow Leopard
    either.)
     
    AES, Jan 31, 2009
    #10
  11. Nelson

    Tim McNamara Guest

    In article <>,
    Marc Heusser <>
    wrote:

    > Leopard works better than Tiger (without bloat!).


    What "bloat" is that?
     
    Tim McNamara, Jan 31, 2009
    #11
  12. In article <>,
    Nelson <> wrote:

    > Maybe I'll just wait for "Snow Leopard" and save myself the hassle of
    > two upgrades.


    Leopard is a fantastic upgrade. But at this point, if your system will
    run Snow Leopard you might as well wait.
     
    Steven Fisher, Feb 1, 2009
    #12
  13. + (Mike Rosenberg):

    > Nelson <> wrote:
    >
    >> Interesting point. Has Apple said it won't support the G4 or just not
    >> said that it would?

    >
    > They haven't specifically stated what the hardware requirements will be,
    > but developer versions have been Intel-only. I don't think there was
    > ever a chance that Snow Leopard would run on G4 machines, though. All
    > the speculation has been about possible support for G5 Macs.


    I can't cite references, but it has been my definite impression that
    snow leopard is more about making the OS more efficient (in space and
    time) than about adding new features, though there will of course be new
    featues as well. And in pursuing this goal of making the OS meaner and
    leaner, it turned out to be too difficult to work with two different
    hardware architectures.

    --
    * Harald Hanche-Olsen <URL:http://www.math.ntnu.no/~hanche/>
    - It is undesirable to believe a proposition
    when there is no ground whatsoever for supposing it is true.
    -- Bertrand Russell
     
    Harald Hanche-Olsen, Feb 1, 2009
    #13
  14. Nelson

    Warren Oates Guest

    In article <>,
    Nelson <> wrote:

    > Interesting point. Has Apple said it won't support the G4 or just not
    > said that it would?


    The install instructions for Snow Leopard say "requires an Intel Mac". I
    know, I know, it's beta, but Apple is/are unlikely to suddenly roll back
    all that 64 bit doohickery (which is a lot of what SL is about) to
    support PPC processors.
    --
    W. Oates
     
    Warren Oates, Feb 1, 2009
    #14
  15. Nelson

    Nick Naym Guest

    In article , Harald Hanche-Olsen at
    wrote on 2/1/09 4:08 AM:

    > + (Mike Rosenberg):
    >
    >> Nelson <> wrote:
    >>
    >>> Interesting point. Has Apple said it won't support the G4 or just not
    >>> said that it would?

    >>
    >> They haven't specifically stated what the hardware requirements will be,
    >> but developer versions have been Intel-only. I don't think there was
    >> ever a chance that Snow Leopard would run on G4 machines, though. All
    >> the speculation has been about possible support for G5 Macs.

    >
    > I can't cite references, but it has been my definite impression that
    > snow leopard is more about making the OS more efficient (in space and
    > time) than about adding new features,



    References abound....

    Straight from the horse's (leopard's?) mouth:
    <http://www.apple.com/macosx/snowleopard/>
    <http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2008/06/09snowleopard.html>

    Many more: <http://is.gd/i07M>




    > though there will of course be new
    > featues as well. And in pursuing this goal of making the OS meaner and
    > leaner, it turned out to be too difficult to work with two different
    > hardware architectures.


    --
    iMac (24", 2.8 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 2GB RAM, 320 GB HDD) € OS X (10.5.4)
     
    Nick Naym, Feb 1, 2009
    #15
  16. + Nick Naym <nicknaym@[remove_this].gmail.com>:

    > In article , Harald Hanche-Olsen at
    > wrote on 2/1/09 4:08 AM:
    >
    >> I can't cite references, but it has been my definite impression that
    >> snow leopard is more about making the OS more efficient (in space and
    >> time) than about adding new features,

    >
    >
    > References abound....
    >
    > Straight from the horse's (leopard's?) mouth:
    > <http://www.apple.com/macosx/snowleopard/>
    > <http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2008/06/09snowleopard.html>


    Thanks. I am sure the second one is the one I was thinking of.

    --
    * Harald Hanche-Olsen <URL:http://www.math.ntnu.no/~hanche/>
    - It is undesirable to believe a proposition
    when there is no ground whatsoever for supposing it is true.
    -- Bertrand Russell
     
    Harald Hanche-Olsen, Feb 1, 2009
    #16
  17. Nelson

    Wes Groleau Guest

    Anic297 wrote:
    > There's something new in Leopard that is useful to me. Have you ever
    > connected to another Mac using the Finder, for file sharing, and shut
    > down the server before the client? In that case, the client will start
    > hanging, trying to find the server (unavailable, of course).
    >
    > In 10.4, it can hang forever, requiring a forced restart.
    > In 10.5, I have never seen it hanging (the "Disconnected from server"
    > window is shown immediately and all is fine).
    >
    > For me, it's a reason to upgrade.


    Or downgrade? :)

    I'm running Panther on two machines, Linux on another, and FreeBSD on
    the fourth, with all of them having the others' disks mounted.

    If I shut one down without dismounting on the others, the Mac(s) pop up
    a "server has become unavailable." Click disconnect, and continue
    working, no problem. (On Panther, i.e., 10.3)


    --
    Wes Groleau

    Thinking it Through, Two
    http://Ideas.Lang-Learn.us/WWW?itemid=506
     
    Wes Groleau, Feb 3, 2009
    #17
  18. In article <4986ce28$0$25810$>,
    Anic297 <> wrote:

    > Jolly Roger a écrit:
    > > And that's just the tip of the iceberg.

    >
    > Once, an Iceberg spoke to me ;-)


    I guess that's why you should wash your lettuce.
     
    Steven Fisher, Feb 3, 2009
    #18
  19. Nelson

    mac user Guest

    In article <>,
    Nelson <> wrote:

    > Tiger works just fine for me and I have been procrastinating upgrading
    > not wanting to deal with all the version incompatibilities with
    > software I already have. And the new permission structure sounds like
    > an added headache, especially if you don't do a clean install. Plus I
    > really can't find any compelling new features. It just looks like
    > bloat. I felt the same way about Spotlight and Widgets prior to
    > upgrading to Leopard and my opinion has not changed. Maybe I'll just
    > wait for "Snow Leopard" and save myself the hassle of two upgrades.


    Tiger has many fine features that I'm still learning how to use, so, I
    didn't upgrade to Leopard either. From what I've read, for some, the
    new features are not necessarily all that more system enhancing or
    useful and the OS is still buggy. But, I read that about Tiger and I
    upgraded and it worked fine for me. Snow Leopard is just going to be a
    small upgrade. Maybe waiting until the next version then catch Leopard
    at a discount - or pass it up.
     
    mac user, Jun 29, 2009
    #19
  20. Nelson

    mac user Guest

    In article <>,
    Stephen Adams <> wrote:

    > Frankly, at this point, unless there is some compelling applicaiton
    > or feature, I'd wait as well. I upgraded ages ago, but having waited
    > this long, it's most likely in your best interests to wait for the
    > next release.
    >
    > -Stephen


    The next release, if it comes, will probably be an OS designed to run on
    netbooks, hand-held devices like the iPhone or something minimal to work
    with cloud computing - the future of computing with most software and
    storage online. If you want to play in those dark online clouds, you
    have to be willing to have everything that you do tracked, logged and
    time-stamped.
     
    mac user, Jun 29, 2009
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Boll Weevil
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    282
    Boll Weevil
    Jan 3, 2005
  2. Fred Mau
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    395
    Fred Mau
    Sep 5, 2005
  3. Tom Scales

    Anybody else find it entertaining

    Tom Scales, Sep 10, 2005, in forum: Dell
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    375
    S.Lewis
    Sep 13, 2005
  4. Fred Mau
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    547
    Christopher Muto
    Sep 14, 2005
  5. WTH
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    244
    Mark Leuck
    Nov 26, 2003
Loading...

Share This Page