PDA

View Full Version : Tiger - better than Panther for average user?




douglas
Jan 25, 2005, 06:14 PM
I'm an architect using my mac for CAD, MS Office, email, internet (still using OS9!). Looking to by a new computer and now waiting until Tiger is out. But... is Tiger really going to be an advantage for me given my uses? Panther appears to be very stable now, and I suppose we can expect a few glitches with the initial Tiger release. Should I just buy now or is Tiger really worth the wait?



jackieonasses
Jan 25, 2005, 06:25 PM
I'm an architect using my mac for CAD, MS Office, email, internet (still using OS9!). Looking to by a new computer and now waiting until Tiger is out. But... is Tiger really going to be an advantage for me given my uses? Panther appears to be very stable now, and I suppose we can expect a few glitches with the initial Tiger release. Should I just buy now or is Tiger really worth the wait? Depends, if you need the computer now - defiantly buy it. Depends my advise is buy any Mac (except the powerbook updates imminent) Just to say, Tiger no doubt will enhance all of our lives, I remember the days of Jaguar when Panther was about to come out and i didn't think it could get any better - but now i hate going back to the seemingly ancient Jaguar.

Just buy now and upgrade later.

kyle

Punani
Jan 25, 2005, 06:39 PM
If you're not in any sort of hurry, I think it'd be best to wait for Tiger's release. Tiger is probably the most major release of OS X since its debut. In addition, if you like tinkering around with internal settings and programs that toy with undocumented APIs you may get irritated if upgrading breaks your customizations (Tiger should be the final version to do this).

sjpetry
Jan 25, 2005, 07:29 PM
I think the difference will be like going from Windows 95 to Windows 98. :cool:

cyanide
Jan 25, 2005, 07:46 PM
I think the difference will be like going from Windows 95 to Windows 98. :cool:
ouch! windows 95 to 98 is like going from crap, to crap with extra stink! no offense, but os x updates are nothing like windows os updates, because they offer a smoother user experience, added stability, and a general IMPROVEMENT in computing. More appropriately, imho, is the statement "I think the difference will be like going from any windows platform to Mac OS X for the first time, you will be blown away!" :D

sjpetry
Jan 25, 2005, 07:51 PM
ouch! windows 95 to 98 is like going from crap, to crap with extra stink! no offense, but os x updates are nothing like windows os updates, because they offer a smoother user experience, added stability, and a general IMPROVEMENT in computing. More appropriately, imho, is the statement "I think the difference will be like going from any windows platform to Mac OS X for the first time, you will be blown away!" :D
The point I was getting at is that it will be a major improvement, just like we saw from 95 to 98 thats what I met. ;)

Macitect
Jan 25, 2005, 10:15 PM
I also work for an architectural firm that recently upgraded from 9.2.2 to 10.3 The difference is stability was astonishing. After two weeks, not one server or client crash. However, much time was spent on installing new X compatible software (Vectorworks, Office, Photoshop) and learning new features. Had some minor networking/file sharing issues but quickly fixed - OK, we broke down and read the instructions :) Actual downtime was really minimal. I say go for it, upgrade to 10.4 this summer.

dotdotdot
Jan 25, 2005, 10:56 PM
ouch! windows 95 to 98 is like going from crap, to crap with extra stink! no offense, but os x updates are nothing like windows os updates, because they offer a smoother user experience, added stability, and a general IMPROVEMENT in computing. More appropriately, imho, is the statement "I think the difference will be like going from any windows platform to Mac OS X for the first time, you will be blown away!" :D

Windows 98 was the safest, best version of Windows before XP SP2 ... 98 never had any big viruses - those were all from ME and then sent down to 98... now, 98 SE was not safe... so 95 to 98 SE is a bad example. If Panther to Tiger is like 95 to 98, I'd wait for Tiger to come out!

JDOG_
Jan 25, 2005, 11:28 PM
Geez, I'd say maybe Windows98 to Windows2000...the latter was awesome.

God, even thinking of ctrl+alt+del right now is making me ill.

Back on topic: I think Tiger will continue the general trend of each .X getting better and better. Panther was really awesome and I think spotlight and dashboard are going to change the way we use our macs more than most people think. I know less clutter on the dock and not having to keep folders so neat because of metadata indexing cover both ends of the clean front; we can be messy but look clean at the same time :D

LimeiBook86
Jan 26, 2005, 12:12 PM
Well usually an upgrade is better than an older version. Haha, :eek:

BUT, there are some exceptions....*ehem* Windows ME :D

wrldwzrd89
Jan 26, 2005, 05:13 PM
I'm an architect using my mac for CAD, MS Office, email, internet (still using OS9!). Looking to by a new computer and now waiting until Tiger is out. But... is Tiger really going to be an advantage for me given my uses? Panther appears to be very stable now, and I suppose we can expect a few glitches with the initial Tiger release. Should I just buy now or is Tiger really worth the wait?
One of the biggest benefits of Tiger is Spotlight, the search system. A future update to Office:Mac 2004 will have Spotlight support (according to Microsoft). If you use Mail as your email application under Mac OS X (it comes with the OS), its Tiger incarnation will also have Spotlight support. You'll be able to locate email messages and Office documents you may have forgotten about. (Disclaimer: I don't use MS Office for Mac myself, but if I did, I'd upgrade to Office:Mac 2004 now and to Tiger as soon as it's released.) I would keep this in mind when making your decision. By the way, have you looked through the resources at http://www.apple.com/macosx/? There's some great information there about both Panther and Tiger.

sushi
Jan 26, 2005, 05:24 PM
I think the difference will be like going from Windows 95 to Windows 98. :cool:
Definitely not a good analogy.

Win95 had over 3,000 documented bugs.

Basically, Win98 was the bug fix for Win95.

Panther is up and running well. Tiger is going to introduce new features. Different situation.

As for the original posters question, if you need the computer now, use Panther and be happy. If not, wait until Tiger is released.

Sushi

sushi
Jan 26, 2005, 05:27 PM
The point I was getting at is that it will be a major improvement, just like we saw from 95 to 98 thats what I met. ;)
What improvements? USB?

Just curious.

Win98 doesn't do a whole lot more than Win95SR2.

Mainly it fixes the bugs.

Sushi

mox358
Jan 27, 2005, 01:02 AM
What improvements? USB?

Just curious.

Win98 doesn't do a whole lot more than Win95SR2.

Mainly it fixes the bugs.

Sushi

personally, i thought 95 was better. before they decided to make internet explorer part of the system and REALLY screw things up. the good old days, when IE was "just another app". you could use USB on 95 (a certain patch did the trick i believe) but it wasn't easy and it wasn't pretty.

i admit it - i had a pc when windows 95 came out... but i'm cured now :)

sushi
Jan 27, 2005, 09:06 AM
you could use USB on 95 (a certain patch did the trick i believe)
You are correct.

Win95 did not support USB

Win95 SR2 did.

Sushi

Westside guy
Jan 27, 2005, 09:48 AM
I believe Win95 sent SMB and/or NetBEUI login info in plaintext by default, while 98SE did not (a big deal if you're on a network). Also, wasn't it 98SE where they switched to FAT32 from FAT16?

On the other hand... 98SE had Active Desktop. :D