Apple Releases Mac OS X 10.6.1

[hwmillerster]

I finally got my AT&T USB 881 aircard to work with 10.6.1. This was one of the fixes that 10.6.1 was supposed to fix, incompatibility with USB aircards. I blame a lot of this on SierraWireless. When I was ready to buy SL, I emailed the company is my present software compatible with SL. No, they said, download this build. I did. I installed SL. I got a fatal error. No internet connectivity. I sent a nasty gram to SierraWatcher. They happily informed me there was a "new" build. I installed it, nice new interface. The company swore up and down with this new update and 10.6.1, you should be good to go. I reinstalled SL, added 10.6.1, and after thoroughly purging my hard drive of all old copies of Sierra Watcher, I finally got Sierra Watcher and Snow Leopard to play nicely together.
:p

[terriyaki]

Are Expose/Spaces animations still choppy on the 9400? Oh and, is there an option for old Expose now?

I'm guessing the answer to both of these will be no :(.

[Haruchai]

Damn.

193610

That was the latest, SL-compatible beta. Oh well, now we wait for GrowlMail to update.

It's actually pretty easy to fix both this and OmniFocus' Mail Clip-o-tron

OmniFocus support article w. instructions (http://forums.omnigroup.com/showpost.php?p=66585&postcount=2)

just be sure to quit mail first, and you need to move the bundle from "~/Library/Mail/Bundles (disabled)" back to "~/Library/Mail/Bundles"

[TitoC]

Oh man, you're gonna set him off. Soon, he'll get all town-hall on you!

All kidding aside, I can understand how he's not thrilled since there are some PPCs that I'd rather have over a MM or MacBook. But he did buy at a bad time and the world has moved on. Imagine how all the people felt who bought HD-DVDs right before they WB Dropped out of making them?

Yeah, I was the same way too about PPCs until my early 2006 Dual 2.5 Ghz PowerPC G5 died on me. Here I had the youngest Mac in the house (I have one of the first iMacs that came out that my 5 year old uses, a G4 and a Mac IIsi that I used many, many years ago- all still running) and it died on my. But in the end, that horror is what brought me to my brand new 2.93 Ghz Quad-Core Mac Pro that I have now.

I kept on reading on several forums where people where having problems with these dual core G5s. But I got to say. I am really liking Snow Leopard. For me, after having so many headaches and heartaches with my old G5 running Leopard in the last year or so, this has been a really nice breath of fresh air.

[mdriftmeyer]

Oh please. I upgraded to Leopard from Tiger, with all my applications in place. Leopard alone doubled my boot time from Tiger, and every subsequent update made it worse. I usually have little to no login items.

Dozens of more background services have been added to Leopard and Snow Leopard since Tiger.

Hell, even lookupd doesn't exist remotely like it did in Tiger.

[PBF]

54.7 MB on my MacBook Pro March 2006. :confused:

[eoren1]

There is no reason to be concerned or to trick the installer into giving you the bigger update. Software update picks the right update for your situation. The 10MB update isn't missing anything.

From http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1228:
"Sometimes, Software Update preferences is able to offer a "smaller-sized Delta" update than you might expect, or smaller than what you might see on other computers installing the same update. The "smaller Delta" updates are offered when some Mac OS X system files can be modified instead of replaced in their entirety."

"Sometimes, modifications made to Mac OS X system files, including ones made by third-party products, may require the installation of a full sized version of a Mac OS X software update. Again, you don't have to worry about figuring out which kind of update is best for you, just let Software Update preferences do the work."

I wasn't trying to 'trick' the Software Update. However, if it shows a 9MB update before I upgrade Adobe's Flash Player and 75MB after, it seems obvious that the 9MB is just the Adobe update and that it likely has to install this first. On completion, it likely will require a second update - this time the full 75MB one.

[zub3qin]

Are Expose/Spaces animations still choppy on the 9400? Oh and, is there an option for old Expose now?

I'm guessing the answer to both of these will be no :(.

Still choppy for me. Also, top sites in Safari still gives the weird vertical bands on the page when it loads up.

[*LTD*]

If drivers for your printer do not show up in Snow Leopard, and there is no option for a generic driver (that you can use until original ones arrive), then you might be in luck if you've got your Leopard disc handy.

Insert your Leopard disc, and then click on Optional Installs. Then in the next window you might have to click on Optional Installs again. From the new Window, select Printer drivers. Select the appropriate brand, and then install.

So really, we're trying to use Leopard drivers here, moved from your Leopard disc onto Snow Leopard.

If you're in luck, usable drivers might show up in your System Preferences, or perhaps a generic driver that will work.

Best of luck!

[parkds]

Still choppy for me. Also, top sites in Safari still gives the weird vertical bands on the page when it loads up.

This update seemed to have solved the banding issue I was having with a new tab was opening in Safari. Also, my MacbookPro was running very sluggish after the 10.6 update, but with 10.6.1, things seem to have gotten resolved and run much smoother. I am on a mid '07 MBP.

[Analog Kid]

Any help with Internet Sharing? My home network has been a token ring since the SL update-- whatever machine holds the token must reboot.

[maconspace]

Still no audio when doing a/v chat in ichat with my 10.5 friends. Still have postscript errors with my HP1006 printer. Still have random Flash 8 problems - some graphics and fonts have moved about 4 pixels down from their original placement after to upgrading to 10.6. If you have CS3, try opening some of your Flash 8 files and you'll notice some things have moved around.

[ratGT]

Anyone know if a combo update for this will be released?

and really, what would that combine?

:D ROFL :D

[gr8phan]

So mine showed as 9MB. I remembered I had downloaded the Adobe flash player but not updated it. I closed the software update, installed the flash player update and then reran software update. It now shows the file size as 75MB. I wonder if the update will do the 9MB flash update first and, when rerun, do the 75MB upgrade. For all those concerned about the 9MB update, go ahead and update the flash player first and you should be all set.
E

Mine showed as 9 MB, as well, but I had not downloaded or updated the Flash player. Running the update did not upgrade flash, either.

[n20nine]

Even after 10.6.1 I still can't print to my HP LaserJet P1006. I have tried all possible solutions and no go. While, I am an IT professional, I may have missed some solution, but I don't believe so. I just get a different error message this time. :mad:


I have the same printer as well, do the below steps and it will work:

1. Download driver from this link: http://download.driverscollection.com/d0c4fb1b27d40fd4ddd22d57830d38b7089746d69aeaac38e765efcc94f51d21065ed42a21e585f8444478ba82bec26c4aa0 5ddc/H/Hewlett-Packard/Printers/LJP1000_P1500_OSX_ful_sol-v1.0.4.dmg
2. goto system preferences
3. printer & fax
4. right click above the +- on the right side where you add printers and reset printer system... *( This will clear all other drivers )
5. with the printer on, install the printer driver you downloaded
6. the go back to printer& fax in system preferences and add the p1006 printer
7. it will select the P1006 printer with auto select,then choose ok
8. restart your Mac

[OZMP]

It's truly disappointing that any Apple system that can run a 64-bit Windows kernel and a 64-bit Linux kernel is arbitrarily blocked from running a 64-bit Apple kernel.

EXACTLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[eoren1]

Mine showed as 9 MB, as well, but I had not downloaded or updated the Flash player. Running the update did not upgrade flash, either.

Did you try running the update again to see if it has anything else to install after the initial 9MB?

[*LTD*]

It's truly disappointing that any Apple system that can run a 64-bit Windows kernel and a 64-bit Linux kernel is arbitrarily blocked from running a 64-bit Apple kernel.

You mean having to type 6 4 when booting, etc?

[gr8phan]

Did you try running the update again to see if it has anything else to install after the initial 9MB?

Yes. Then I realized that I had not booted into 64-bit, so I did and ran it again - nothing. I'm not really concerned, just sharing some details.

[jpma]

isn't it hold 64 instead of type 64 during bootup?

[eastcoastsurfer]

You mean having to type 6 4 when booting, etc?

isn't it hold 64 instead of type 64 during bootup?

That doesn't work with an Santa Rosa MBP 3,1. It's being arbitrarily blocked. 64 bit linux and Windows 64 run just fine on the same machine.

[alm99]

Anyone have issues with this update?

I installed the update and the computer rebooted, but now it just hangs at a blue screen with the spinning dial/dash marks.

[Amdahl]

It's a moot point now, but if you'd just done a clean reinstall, Leopard would've gotten back up to speed.

My G5 started to get a little sluggish somewhere in the 10.5.4 range and I just reinstalled everything. It was as snappy as the day I got it afterwards (unsurprisingly).

This is called 'fragmentation.' You can also fix it with a 'defragmenter.'

[spillproof]

Are Expose/Spaces animations still choppy on the 9400? Oh and, is there an option for old Expose now?

I'm guessing the answer to both of these will be no :(.

I have zero choppyness on 10.6.0 using 9400M. (2.4Ghz 4GBram late 2008 15" MBP.) Weird, many of you are.

I just wish the blue highlight color would be the same as your selected color for highlights (ie. green, orange, ...)

[mrj412]

There is no reason to be concerned or to trick the installer into giving you the bigger update. Software update picks the right update for your situation. The 10MB update isn't missing anything.

"Sometimes, modifications made to Mac OS X system files, including ones made by third-party products, may require the installation of a full sized version of a Mac OS X software update.

I think this may be it ... If you have not updated the flash plugin manually and have the 10.6.0 flash files, the small update can patch them. The manual update of flash to the latest version prior to applying 10.6.1 requires the full update since the updater does not see the 10.6.0 flash files and cannot simply patch them.

[D*I*S_Frontman]

Just completed the SU, repaired permissions, rebooted.

Safari no longer hangs up on me like it did before the update.

Firefox goes back into the toolbox. Safari is once again ready for prime time.

[Bubba Satori]

There's going to be a lot these. SL was rushed out the door for a reason. 6 weeks of public beta before October 22nd.

[Drag'nGT]

10.6.1 working well here. I didn't try to put my printer back on after I clean installed SL. I had other things but I had already planned to hook the printer back up this after noon when I realized last night I needed to print at home instead of at work. So when I saw that the update had printer drivers I don't know if that had any effect on my wireless printer working but it works. Took all of 10 min to install and set up. :D Printer: Canon MP620 Incase anyone wanted to know.

[cdembek]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7C144 Safari/528.16)

Selected to install the update, laptop rebooted and now it just appears as if the os is going to load but nothing happens.... Should I be nervous???

[Jelite]

Zoom now works smoothly in my iPhoto after the update, it was like slow motion before.
iTunes now scrolls smoothly too.

The only issue i have left now is my intermittent internet, it goes from working perfectly to not at all constantly.:(

[HyperZboy]

This is called 'fragmentation.' You can also fix it with a 'defragmenter.'

Personally, I thought Leopard was sluggish out the gate with 10.5.0 compared to Tiger on every G5 I own.

And it only got worse from there, but I tend to defragment my G5s often, so I'd say that its true. If you defragment often, you'll at least keep Leopard as fast as the day you originally installed it.

And another thing you can do is use Xslimmer to yank all the Intel code and languages you don't use. It doesn't necessarily make the applications much faster, but it definitely does clean up your hard drive and free up space and probably helps your hard drive a bit to access files quicker.

Compared to Tiger which was quick and fast and still is on all my G5s, Leopard still to this day has a Windows sluggish feel to it, too many spinning beach balls, too many browser crashes. I will give Apple credit for one thing though. I no longer have any kernel panics. God knows how many I reported in the earlier Leopard versions, I've lost track.

Finally, all of the optimizations that would solve some of the sluggishness have basically gone into Snow Leopard instead and left PowerPC users at the alter after paying for the $129 marriage license. :(

[jmpage2]

I think this may be it ... If you have not updated the flash plugin manually and have the 10.6.0 flash files, the small update can patch them. The manual update of flash to the latest version prior to applying 10.6.1 requires the full update since the updater does not see the 10.6.0 flash files and cannot simply patch them.

That's possible but it is hard to believe that so many people getting the 75MB update had updated their flash version.

I never updated Flash on my 4850 equipped iMac and got the 9MB update. Running software update again shows no new updates for my Mac.

[McBeresford]

Totally JACKED my unibody 2.4 MB. Every sleep forces me to reset the pmu. Simply doesn't wake up. Not a good update.

[cdembek]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7C144 Safari/528.16)

After the reboot, loads to a blue screen, little circle displays then flashes and back to the blue screen... any suggestions???

[Van W]

There's going to be a lot these. SL was rushed out the door for a reason. 6 weeks of public beta before October 22nd.


What happens Oct 22?

[jw2002]

And it only got worse from there, but I tend to defragment my G5s often, so I'd say that its true. If you defragment often, you'll at least keep Leopard as fast as the day you originally installed it.


In HFS+ systems there should be hardly any reason to ever defragment. I seriously doubt that a measurable performance difference can be discerned unless you are running on incredibly low disk space. I do tons of compiling under OS X which in theory should lead to tons of fragmentation issues with itty bitty files being created and destroyed over and over. Yet I am not seeing any degradation in compile time as the system ages. I am confident that most people who defragment do so without actually determining the true issue that is slowing their computer down.

Let the PC system admins waste their time defragmenting. It's all they know how to do anyway...

[ivnj]

Mac mini late 2006 I believe. Core duo 1.66 cd burner 2gb ram 60gb hd.

Just installed snow on top of regular without the snow. More snappy and even my desktop photo looks brighter and more crisp.

And it also asked for 10.6.1. in software update so I went ahead and did it. Only 9.8mb. Have not tried my dads mackbook pro yet. That will be next.

[gibbz]

Totally JACKED my unibody 2.4 MB. Every sleep forces me to reset the pmu. Simply doesn't wake up. Not a good update.

That stinks.

Mine is working fine though.

[robco]

Wow! Blew some dust out of my iMac vents and it seems to be running so much faster and Safari doesn't crash anymore! :D

[gibbz]

What happens Oct 22?

MicroSloth Winblows 7

Link (http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2009/06/windows-7-arrives-on-october-22.ars)

[maghemi]

Well Safari is definitely more snappier with the update :p

Not that I actually use safari

[VSMacOne]

Totally JACKED my unibody 2.4 MB. Every sleep forces me to reset the pmu. Simply doesn't wake up. Not a good update.

This has happened to me a couple of times since upgrading... No solution yet.

[cdembek]

Suggestions????

[Matthewlee]

Sorry if this has been mentioned in on of the previous messages, but I believe the difference between the 9mb update and the 75mb update all has to do with iTunes 9. 10.6 shipped by default with iTunes 8. I updated to iTunes9 last night. Today, my update was only 9mb. So, for those of you with the 9mb update: did you update to iTunes 9 yesterday? And, for those with the 75mb update: open iTunes - have you magically been updated to 9.0?

The 10.6.1 update solved my only issue: sluggish graphics peformance out of my ATI 3870 card on my 2008 Mac Pro. I was getting terrible performance out of Aperture, and videos would freeze (while the audio continued) in both QuickLook and QuickTime. So, as those are now all performing wonderfully, I'm pretty confident that a graphics card driver update was included in the 9mb update.

[TPALTony]

Sorry if this has been mentioned in on of the previous messages, but I believe the difference between the 9mb update and the 75mb update all has to do with iTunes 9. 10.6 shipped by default with iTunes 8. I updated to iTunes9 last night. Today, my update was only 9mb. So, for those of you with the 9mb update: did you update to iTunes 9 yesterday? And, for those with the 75mb update: open iTunes - have you magically been updated to 9.0?

Nope that's not it. I just ran SU on my intel mac mini and it showed TWO updates. iTunes 9 (80+mb) and 10.6.1 (9MB)

So whatever makes it use the other 66MB, it's not iTunes :)

[neteng101]

10.6.1 on my 2.53" 15" uMBP (late '08) has resulted in dramatically reduced CPU usage, fan doesn't spin up so much anymore. Previously, Firefox and Skype used to suck up CPU, Youtube would really cause it to sweat, but now even with Youtube, its way lower, lower than what I saw even with 10.5.8 previously.

I don't know what happened, but the update is making a huge difference for me.

[ImperialX]

I'm using a Late 2008 2.4Ghz White MacBook. Only 9.8MB.

[cdembek]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7C144 Safari/528.16)

Re installed SL ... all is back!!

[alphaod]

75.2MB on 10.6 server and client on a Mac Pro and MacBook Air respectively.

Sorry if this has been mentioned in on of the previous messages, but I believe the difference between the 9mb update and the 75mb update all has to do with iTunes 9. 10.6 shipped by default with iTunes 8. I updated to iTunes9 last night. Today, my update was only 9mb. So, for those of you with the 9mb update: did you update to iTunes 9 yesterday? And, for those with the 75mb update: open iTunes - have you magically been updated to 9.0?


I've had iTunes 9 and my update was still 75.2MB

[Amdahl]

Compared to Tiger which was quick and fast and still is on all my G5s, Leopard still to this day has a Windows sluggish feel to it, too many spinning beach balls, too many browser crashes. I will give Apple credit for one thing though. I no longer have any kernel panics. God knows how many I reported in the earlier Leopard versions, I've lost track.


I never had crash problems with Leopard, but it was definitely not as fast on most G5s, with the exception of Quad G5s that have the 970MP processor. I attribute this to the larger cache on the 970MP. (Although, the extra cores may be a factor as well.)

[nrivas]

Late 2008 MacBook unibody 75.2mb

[METOO999]

My black Macbook C2D had the big install plus HP printer driver update 2.1 for my HP PSC 2210 driver. The white CD Macbook in my household had only the 9 MB update and no HP update even though both computers use the same printer. I think I installed the HP driver when I installed SL on my black book. :confused: My black book is a little more customized than the white one, nothing special except Perian and Glimmerblocker though.

[HyperZboy]

In HFS+ systems there should be hardly any reason to ever defragment. I seriously doubt that a measurable performance difference can be discerned unless you are running on incredibly low disk space. I do tons of compiling under OS X which in theory should lead to tons of fragmentation issues with itty bitty files being created and destroyed over and over. Yet I am not seeing any degradation in compile time as the system ages. I am confident that most people who defragment do so without actually determining the true issue that is slowing their computer down.

Let the PC system admins waste their time defragmenting. It's all they know how to do anyway...

Since you didn't mention what type of Macs you're using, I'll take your word.
Keep in mind though, I'm talking about much older hard drives. I even have Leopard installed on some G4s, so I can definitely see a difference depending on how old the Mac is. The most noticeable difference after defragmenting that I tend to see is faster boot times.

[Paulshaqz]

only 9.8mb for the update for me... thats odd how some of you guys have a bigger file?

[richard.mac]

awesome! updates to Snow Leopard are fine by me.

although im a bit late to the game installing (well for MacRumors) i saw a post on MacTalk.com.au saying that the Australian Apple retail stores where installing the dev build of 10.6.1 10B504 on all the computers as it may have no known issues, so i knew the update would come very soon.

[MacAndy74]

Completed the update. MBP works just the same as before. Haven't noticed any differences in any way. :cool:

[rwilliams]

Hooray, my MacBook no longer goes to sleep on its own - again. Dammit Apple, I just fixed this the day after I installed Snow Leopard, and now I have to go through the troubleshooting all over again.

[iMaggot]

Installed the update and it all went well.

[RazHyena]

Flash repeatedly fails now. :(

[HyperZboy]

Mac mini late 2006 I believe. Core duo 1.66 cd burner 2gb ram 60gb hd.

Just installed snow on top of regular without the snow. More snappy and even my desktop photo looks brighter and more crisp.

And it also asked for 10.6.1. in software update so I went ahead and did it. Only 9.8mb. Have not tried my dads mackbook pro yet. That will be next.

Just think... A $3300 QUAD-CORE 2.5 GHz PowerMac G5 with a 250GB SATA hard drive & a 16X DVD-R that was for sale around the same time cannot even run Snow Leopard at all and will probably never get any of these bug fixes and optimizations to their $129 copy of regular Leopard.
And that's the same price that INTEL users paid!

Go Figure.

Reminds me of when Steve Jobs arrogantly put MacOS 9 in a coffin to make a PR statement.
And now this past year, he almost ended up in one himself sadly.

Karma maybe? No, I don't believe in that myself.

But I do think Apple is screwing over a significant number of its loyal customers.

[heisetax]

I'm still running 10.6, now 10.6.1 on a different drive partition than which I run 10.5.8. So far 10.6 seems to be slower than 10.5.8. I'm running this on a 1st gen 3 GHz Intel Mac Pro with 13 GB of Ram, 2 1.5 TB HD & 2 WD 150 GB drives in a RAID 1 that I use as my normal 10.5.8 boot drive. I'm currently running under a 10.5.8 partition on one of the 1.5 TB drives. I was having browser problems & in the update process the computer switched start-up drives back to my normal setup. This was even though the system was set to start-up from the updated 10.6.1.

Tomorrow I will test again. Even with the more minor changes made in 10.6 it seems as if it may be 10.6.2 or 10.6.3 before it will be ready to take over running my Intel Mac. I still may not change as I like to run all of my Macs under the same OS, 10.5.8.

I'll be listening & watching here to see what problems people are having. I make my living running my business using Excel 11, aka Excel 2004. For that reason I have to run Rosetta.

[f00f]

Looking at the bom ought to offer some hints as to the size differences. Something like (in terminal):


lsbom -flbc -p sf /private/var/db/receipts/com.apple.pkg.update.os.10.6.1.bom | sort -nr -k1,1


My update was 75.1MB for my Macmini3,1; I had installed iTunes 9 and the latest Flash plugin a day before 10.6.1 was released.

The top 10 largest components in my case:

45340400 ./System/Library/Frameworks/AppKit.framework/Versions/C/AppKit
13972240 ./System/Library/Extensions/GeForce8xxxGLDriver.bundle/Contents/MacOS/GeForce8xxxGLDriver
13926560 ./System/Library/Extensions/AppleIntelGMAX3100GLDriver.bundle/Contents/MacOS/AppleIntelGMAX3100GLDriver
13898128 ./System/Library/Frameworks/Message.framework/Versions/B/Message
13611232 ./Library/Internet Plug-Ins/Flash Player.plugin/Contents/MacOS/Flash Player
12440544 ./System/Library/Extensions/GeForce7xxxGLDriver.bundle/Contents/MacOS/GeForce7xxxGLDriver
8968384 ./System/Library/Extensions/ATIRadeonX2000GLDriver.bundle/Contents/MacOS/ATIRadeonX2000GLDriver
7944096 ./System/Library/Extensions/GeForce8xxxGLDriver.bundle/Contents/MacOS/libclh.dylib
7512896 ./Applications/Mail.app/Contents/MacOS/Mail
6843584 ./usr/lib/libSystem.B.dylib


FWIW my Mini had SL cleanly installed.

[Trexznl]

Just think... A $3300 QUAD-CORE 2.5 GHz PowerMac G5 with a 250GB SATA hard drive & a 16X DVD-R that was for sale around the same time cannot even run Snow Leopard at all and will probably never get any of these bug fixes and optimizations to their $129 copy of regular Leopard.
And that's the same price that INTEL users paid!

Go Figure.

Reminds me of when Steve Jobs arrogantly put MacOS 9 in a coffin to make a PR statement.
And now this past year, he almost ended up in one himself sadly.

Karma maybe? No, I don't believe in that myself.

But I do think Apple is screwing over a significant number of its loyal customers.

Could you please shut it.

Who cares about you. Your hardware is outdated. Let me spell that out for you: O U T D A T E D.

That's what you get with three year old hardware, especially in the computer world. You cannot expect to still get support for such an ancient piece of technology.

OS X 10.6 isn't that revolutionary and you'll be good to go with Leopard. There are more people having problems with 10.6 than with 10.5.8 so consider this before you take another pill.

[5DollaFootlong]

Flash repeatedly fails now. :(

yep. no gmail, youtube, or facebook for me

[devburke]

Could you please shut it.

Who cares about you. Your hardware is outdated. Let me spell that out for you: O U T D A T E D.

That's what you get with three year old hardware, especially in the computer world. You cannot expect to still get support for such an ancient piece of technology.

OS X 10.6 isn't that revolutionary and you'll be good to go with Leopard. There are more people having problems with 10.6 than with 10.5.8 so consider this before you take another pill.

Hey man, lighten up, three years isn’t that long. I just got my MacBook two years ago, and the idea of support for it being completely dropped in one more year seems harsh. We can’t all afford to run out and buy a new MBP every time Apple announces an update.

Just think... A $3300 QUAD-CORE 2.5 GHz PowerMac G5 with a 250GB SATA hard drive & a 16X DVD-R that was for sale around the same time cannot even run Snow Leopard at all and will probably never get any of these bug fixes and optimizations to their $129 copy of regular Leopard.
And that's the same price that INTEL users paid!

Go Figure.

Reminds me of when Steve Jobs arrogantly put MacOS 9 in a coffin to make a PR statement.
And now this past year, he almost ended up in one himself sadly.

Karma maybe? No, I don't believe in that myself.

But I do think Apple is screwing over a significant number of its loyal customers.

As for you, calm down. You’re not screwed. You’re not missing out on that much. Snow Leopard is basically the same thing as Leopard to the user. A tweak here, a minor fix there (and at this point, more bugs than Leopard, although it’s been smooth for me). But moving back to Leopard wouldn’t phase me, because as far as I, the user, am concerned, it’s almost exactly the same. And Leopard is a very powerful and stable OS as it is. Just because you can’t use SL doesn’t mean that suddenly your Leopard is falling apart.

Just trust me, I like Snow Leopard, but you’re not really missing out on all that much. Now enjoy your rock-solid, powerful, and very stable OS.

[devburke]

yep. no gmail, youtube, or facebook for me

I’m pretty sure only one of those things uses Flash…

[DMann]

I doubt it will, but I hope it fixes my iTunes 9 issue. Every time I open up iTunes 9, I get the Firewall prompt that asks me to either "Allow" or "Deny" it incoming network connections. I click "Allow", but it still prompts me. I also checked my Firewall settings and iTunes is in there.

I have tried reinstalling iTunes 9. I don't have Little Snitch or any other network monitor running. Hmmmm.Little Snitch happens to have a mind of its own - the only way that I was able to eliminate the prompts, which run in the background regardless of whether you are running LS or not, was to locate the LS uninstaller, which is supplied with the installation package - LPITA

[trunkster]

The font smoothing for 3rd party monitors is still not working. Seems like a rushed update to me, get the most complained about stuff working first and then work on a 10.6.2 release for next month.

[ThomasJL]

Safari does see more peppy.

Peppy? Oh, you mean snappy. :D

[CQd44]

The whole hardware being outdated thing reminds me of the initial switch to Vista.

[funkdis]

2 weeks after release a patch is needed? :wtf:

[jaw04005]

Hey man, lighten up, three years isn’t that long. I just got my MacBook two years ago, and the idea of support for it being completely dropped in one more year seems harsh. We can’t all afford to run out and buy a new MBP every time Apple announces an update.

No, but HyperZboy’s particular Power Mac model was introduced after Apple announced the switch to Intel processors. He knew the writing was on the wall before he even purchased it (it was introduced in October of 2005 and discontinued in August of 2006, the Intel switch was announced in June of 2005), yet he continues to spew about Snow Leopard being incompatible with PPC Macs in multiple threads.

It’s getting old. Apple supported PPC in their operating systems for some 50 months (4 years, 2 months, 22 days) after announcing their switch to Intel. That’s a fair amount of time. It’s time to move on.

[devburke]

No, but HyperZboy’s particular Power Mac model was introduced after Apple announced the switch to Intel processors. He knew the writing was on the wall before he even purchased it (it was introduced in October of 2005 and discontinued in August of 2006, the Intel switch was announced in June of 2005), yet he continues to spew about Snow Leopard being incompatible with PPC Macs in multiple threads.

It’s getting old.

I’ll agree that he’s overreacting…a lot. But I disagree with the idea that a three year old computer is ancient.

[electroshock]

Wow! Blew some dust out of my iMac vents and it seems to be running so much faster and Safari doesn't crash anymore! :D

Reminds me of the time my boss's workstation kept crashing then one day, wouldn't boot. So I, being a few thousand miles away at the moment, suggested he open it up, take the power supply unit outside and blow dust out of it (but not to open it up).

He looked at me like I was crazy. "You pulling my leg?" "No, sir. Just a hunch." "Huh. OK..."

10 minutes later, he was shaking his head. "I'll be darned. Booting now." Didn't crash again after that, either. :D

He also mentioned his PSU was apparently the home to an entire family of dust bunnies, too. ;)

[LEStudios]

Mine is 75.1MB.

Me too I got a 2009 Mac mini. :D

[LEStudios]

Just think... A $3300 QUAD-CORE 2.5 GHz PowerMac G5 with a 250GB SATA hard drive & a 16X DVD-R that was for sale around the same time cannot even run Snow Leopard at all and will probably never get any of these bug fixes and optimizations to their $129 copy of regular Leopard.
And that's the same price that INTEL users paid!

Go Figure.

Reminds me of when Steve Jobs arrogantly put MacOS 9 in a coffin to make a PR statement.
And now this past year, he almost ended up in one himself sadly.

Karma maybe? No, I don't believe in that myself.

But I do think Apple is screwing over a significant number of its loyal customers.


Dude its business get over it. Intel, AMD, ATI, NVIDIA, Apple and Microsoft keep making products to make consumers buy. Therefore the word progress comes to play. Now that being said you got to gripe about the other companies so let's get started.

[Alfred.Woodden]

Mine's 145.7mb

MacBook Pro Unibody 15" Late 2008.

[Eidorian]

I'm still getting crashes after using the Open file dialog under 10.6.1.

[Stiss]

I've not updated mine yet, i checked last night and it was just of 10MB.

i hope it fixes QT X. Im sick of getting a beechball when i want to move through a clip thats 9 mins in length >>

[Simon R.]

It doesn't fix the "iTunes keeps relaunching itself after quitting and uses way too much CPU when just being open" issue (I know other people have that issue as well). Apple really f*cked up this time with 10.6.x and iTunes... :confused:

[Eidorian]

I'm getting graphical glitches now. This one is obvious. Get Info doesn't work either. The windows are corrupted.

[DMann]

It doesn't fix the "iTunes keeps relaunching itself after quitting and uses way too much CPU when just being open" issue (I know other people have that issue as well). Apple really f*cked up this time with 10.6.x and iTunes... :confused:Experiencing quite the contrary - iTunes 9 opens very quickly, is significantly more responsive, scrolls ridiculously fast, utilizes 0-0.9 % CPU with 16 Threads according to Activity Monitor, and has neither crashed nor spontaneously restarted on a Mac Mini, four 24" iMacs, and an 8-Core Mac Pro, which had not always been the case while running a library of over 60G.

[Eidorian]

Experiencing quite the contrary - iTunes 9 opens very quickly, is significantly more responsive, scrolls ridiculously fast, utilizes 0-0.9 % CPU with 16 Threads according to Activity Monitor, and has neither crashed nor spontaneously restarted on a Mac Mini, four 24" iMacs, and an 8-Core Mac Pro.Scrolling is noticeably faster. That hit me at the first launch. It doesn't seem to launch much faster though.

I've having problems hiding iTunes 9 and returning focus to it. I don't know if that's Snow Leopard or iTunes 9 though.

[DMann]

Scrolling is noticeably faster. That hit me at the first launch. It doesn't seem to launch much faster though.

I've having problems hiding iTunes 9 and returning focus to it. I don't know if that's Snow Leopard or iTunes 9 though.No problems hiding it here - perhaps you ought to bring your Macbook to an Apple Store to show them the problems that you're having. They'll likely recommend a clean install before doing any diagnostics on it - however, it seems you either have hardware issues, RAM issues, or some mightily corrupted files which may be interfering with the Core Graphics engine and the operation of the OS itself.

[Eidorian]

No problems hiding it here - perhaps you ought to bring your Macbook to an Apple Store to show them the problems that you're having. They'll likely recommend a clean install before doing any diagnostics on it - however, it seems you either have hardware issues, RAM issues, or some mightily corrupted files which may be interfering with the Core Graphics engine and the operation of the OS itself.It happens on the iMac Core Duo I have running Snow Leopard as well. iTunes just doesn't want to come into focus after being hidden.

I'm having doubts about the new GMA X3100 kernel extension in 10.6.1 as well.

[hank-b]

I know I'm going to get slammed for this post by the INTEL masses again (and there won't be any PowerPC people here to defend me because they've stopped reading about Snow Leopard mostly), but so be it. I think Apple has abandoned not only PowerPC, but left people who paid $129 for Leopard with an unfinished product that is now basically FIXED or STILL GETTING FIXED in Snow Leopard. That's how I feel.

Where is my 10.5.9?

Ya know, the version of Leopard that stops Safari from crashing 8-12 times a week, and gives PowerPC users some of the bug fixes in 10.6 and 10.6.1.

Ya know, the version of Leopard for those people who paid the SAME $129 for Leopard and don't get any of the Snow Leopard bug fixes (except for security fixes)!

Ya know, the version of Leopard that fixes some of the interface anomalies.

I won't even get into the fact that some of the new features in SL could be PowerPC compatible because that's a whole other argument.

Don't get me wrong, I applaud Apple for continuing security releases for even Tiger at this time, although I'm sure that'll stop soon though.

But, some features even in iTunes 9 work in Windows XP & Intel Macs yet won't work on faster more powerful PowerPC Macs sold just 3 years ago. I can understand Apple discontinuing G3 support (that quietly kind of went unnoticed), but iMac G5s and PowerMac G5s were quite expensive machines to abandon in my opinion on some of those features and I'm not sure I can see a technical reason why other than Apple just saying FU customer.

Makes no sense w/ Snow Leopard or iTunes... Why would a less powerful NON-APPLE machine be supported over a more powerful $3000 APPLE machine that's only 3 years old?

Not to mention Quicktime X... If that gets released for Windows XP & Vista and not for Apple's own $3000 more powerful Powermac G5s sold 3 years ago, I think I'll go postal.

I hate to say it, but if that happens, I'll be taking a serious look at Windows 7.
And that would be the first time I considered purchasing a PC since 1987!

This is a very poor way to treat your loyal hardware customers Apple IMHO. :(

PS: Let the attacks begin...


I don't see what the problem is - I use a G3 iMac running Tiger and a new 2.93GHz iMac running Snow Leopard. Apple releasing Snow Leopard only for Intel machines hasn't stopped my old G3 working just as well as it always has. Sure, it would be nice to use, say, Time Machine on the G3 machine but it didn't run Time Machine when I bought it so I don't see why Apple should be obliged to make sure it can run it now.

- HB

[DMann]

It happens on the iMac Core Duo I have running Snow Leopard as well. iTunes just doesn't want to come into focus when being hidden.I've been trying to reproduce the problem to no avail. If the Finder is unable to 'Show' a 'Hidden' app, something is likely interfering - does clicking on the Finder consistently bring up a new folder? If this is due to a kernel extension glitch, hopefully it gets attended to soon.

[Eidorian]

I've been trying to reproduce the problem to no avail. If the Finder is unable to 'Show' a 'Hidden' app, something is likely interfering - does clicking on the Finder consistently bring up a new folder? If this is due to a kernel extension glitch, hopefully it gets attended to soon.I think something is stalling when iTunes is trying to get back into view. There isn't a beachball either it just stalls coming back in. Activity Monitor never shows anything strange either.

The iMac Core Duo gets graphical glitches as well under Leopard and Snow Leopard but not under Tiger. Tiger had its own issues too relating to USB file transfers. Time Machine choked under Leopard but it works perfectly now under Snow Leopard.

[DMann]

I think something is stalling when iTunes is trying to get back into view. There isn't a beachball either it just stalls coming back in. Activity Monitor never shows anything strange either. Do you by chance have an external HD connected which contains an additional iTunes library? The stalling may be due to iTunes attempting to access external or redundant files located in secondary libraries.

[Simon R.]

Experiencing quite the contrary - iTunes 9 opens very quickly, is significantly more responsive, scrolls ridiculously fast, utilizes 0-0.9 % CPU with 16 Threads according to Activity Monitor, and has neither crashed nor spontaneously restarted on a Mac Mini, four 24" iMacs, and an 8-Core Mac Pro, which had not always been the case while running a library of over 60G.

I am not saying iTunes in general uses more CPU or anything. And I am not saying everybody have this problem, but I know I'm not alone in experiencing this weird behaviour from iTunes since upgrading to Snow Leopard. So obviously they screwed something up, since I never experienced anything like this before. Yes, repaired permissons etc etc. Waiting for Apple to fix this problem with their core application...

[MacHiavelli]

how do you check whether your in 64 bit mode?

:apple:
About This Mac
More Info
Software
64-bit Kernel and Extensions: //Yes /// No //

[JackieTreehorn]

It doesn't fix the "iTunes keeps relaunching itself after quitting and uses way too much CPU when just being open" issue (I know other people have that issue as well). Apple really f*cked up this time with 10.6.x and iTunes... :confused:

Perhaps you're using iWow? Genredetection might be the culprit here; try opening Activity Monitor and killing Genredetection. That should prevent iTunes from relaunching.

[Macmel]

No, but HyperZboy’s particular Power Mac model was introduced after Apple announced the switch to Intel processors. He knew the writing was on the wall before he even purchased it (it was introduced in October of 2005 and discontinued in August of 2006, the Intel switch was announced in June of 2005), yet he continues to spew about Snow Leopard being incompatible with PPC Macs in multiple threads.

It’s getting old. Apple supported PPC in their operating systems for some 50 months (4 years, 2 months, 22 days) after announcing their switch to Intel. That’s a fair amount of time. It’s time to move on.

And who says is not supporting it? Well after the release of Leopard, Apple kept releasing updates for Tiger and I'm pretty sure they're going to do it now for Leopard. It's just Snow Leopard won't work on PPC Macs.
But what does he expect anyway? Backwards compatibility until... When exactly? G4? G3? Motorola processors?. 3 years is more than enough time for people who really care about computers (people that actually work with them) to switch to a newer system. For people who doesn't care or don't need to have the latest technology, Snow leopard won't be any different than Leopard anyway, so no point in spending $29.
Actually, all these bugs that the guy complains about in the G5 system, are probably caused by the fact it is a G5. Leopard was running perfectly on my system from day one (I think I got it with .2 or .3 version on it) and has only been perfect (MBP C2D penryn, early 2008). Snow Leopard wouldn't have improved that for him.
I'm sorry he paid $3300 but he did it for an already outdated piece of technology, not a very intelligent move. And expecting to have a top notch system for more than 3 years is just daydreaming.

[MacHiavelli]

Still no support for HP Deskjet 2100 series. Thanks alot HP *******s. I am going to have to buy a new printer, and I'll never buy another HP!

F2100?

Drivers here if yes ...

http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=2131363&start=450&tstart=0

[farleysmaster]

Damn.

193610

That was the latest, SL-compatible beta. Oh well, now we wait for GrowlMail to update.

Or check the growl forums...

[GoKyu]

My Software Update says it's 75.1MB - Mac Pro (Early 2008).

Interesting, I also have an early 2008 Mac Pro, and mine is only 9.8 megs.

[Skorpion24]

Anyone noticed slowdowns with spaces?

[Simon R.]

Perhaps you're using iWow? Genredetection might be the culprit here; try opening Activity Monitor and killing Genredetection. That should prevent iTunes from relaunching.

Nope, not using that, never heard of it.

[Concorde Rules]

2 weeks after release a patch is needed? :wtf:

Ummn....

Let me point out that Snow Leopard has been GOLD MASTER, IE, the release build was FINISHED, about 6 weeks ago.

So no, this update is 6 weeks in the making.

And for some of us everything was working fine anyway, so the patch wasn't needed.

@ PPC people. Half the benefit to Snow Leopard was the fact PPC was dropped, file sizes wouldn't have changed much, optimisation wouldn't have been so great and basically us Intel owners would have been screwed over.

Your annoyed because your tech is out of date, well tough, its 3 years which is a hell of a long time in the computer world, things are now 4-6 times quicker than it...

Some people moan for the hell of it and some just don't have a clue. :rolleyes:

[jmpage2]

Just think... A $3300 QUAD-CORE 2.5 GHz PowerMac G5 with a 250GB SATA hard drive & a 16X DVD-R that was for sale around the same time cannot even run Snow Leopard at all and will probably never get any of these bug fixes and optimizations to their $129 copy of regular Leopard.
And that's the same price that INTEL users paid!

Go Figure.

Reminds me of when Steve Jobs arrogantly put MacOS 9 in a coffin to make a PR statement.
And now this past year, he almost ended up in one himself sadly.

Karma maybe? No, I don't believe in that myself.

But I do think Apple is screwing over a significant number of its loyal customers.

Wow, try to put Steve Jobs and coffin in the same sentence. You're a real class act fella.

[EagerDragon]

I know I'm going to get slammed for this post by the INTEL masses again (and there won't be any PowerPC people here to defend me because they've stopped reading about Snow Leopard mostly), but so be it. I think Apple has abandoned not only PowerPC, but left people who paid $129 for Leopard with an unfinished product that is now basically FIXED or STILL GETTING FIXED in Snow Leopard. That's how I feel.

Where is my 10.5.9?

Ya know, the version of Leopard that stops Safari from crashing 8-12 times a week, and gives PowerPC users some of the bug fixes in 10.6 and 10.6.1.

Ya know, the version of Leopard for those people who paid the SAME $129 for Leopard and don't get any of the Snow Leopard bug fixes (except for security fixes)!

Ya know, the version of Leopard that fixes some of the interface anomalies.

I won't even get into the fact that some of the new features in SL could be PowerPC compatible because that's a whole other argument.

Don't get me wrong, I applaud Apple for continuing security releases for even Tiger at this time, although I'm sure that'll stop soon though.

But, some features even in iTunes 9 work in Windows XP & Intel Macs yet won't work on faster more powerful PowerPC Macs sold just 3 years ago. I can understand Apple discontinuing G3 support (that quietly kind of went unnoticed), but iMac G5s and PowerMac G5s were quite expensive machines to abandon in my opinion on some of those features and I'm not sure I can see a technical reason why other than Apple just saying FU customer.

Makes no sense w/ Snow Leopard or iTunes... Why would a less powerful NON-APPLE machine be supported over a more powerful $3000 APPLE machine that's only 3 years old?

Not to mention Quicktime X... If that gets released for Windows XP & Vista and not for Apple's own $3000 more powerful Powermac G5s sold 3 years ago, I think I'll go postal.

I hate to say it, but if that happens, I'll be taking a serious look at Windows 7.
And that would be the first time I considered purchasing a PC since 1987!

This is a very poor way to treat your loyal hardware customers Apple IMHO. :(

PS: Let the attacks begin...

I run sweet and clean on a 2008 Unibody MBP 15, 5,1 with 4 Gig Mem and 10.6. Zero Issues. Clean in 32 bit mode and 64 bit mode. Have adopted 64 bit mode for day to day use.

It is possible that your problems are comming from Kernel Extensions and or in the case of Safari from Safari plugins.

You may want to do a backup, then do a clean install and migrate your data only. Then install your tools and staying away from plugins and things like that.

Good luck

[AdeFowler]

Reading through this thread makes me kinda glad that I'm stuck with Leopard and PPC ;)

[SpaceKitty]

Reading through this thread makes me kinda glad that I'm stuck with Leopard and PPC ;)

I have only been using SL for barely two days now since it came on my new MBP. I'm loving it so far. Lots of nice little changes and it seems very stable.

I didn't read the whole thread so I have no idea what people have been having problems with.

[Concorde Rules]

Reading through this thread makes me kinda glad that I'm stuck with Leopard and PPC ;)

Come on... it's hardly fair to comment when its 95% people with problems posting.

Three machines here all running perfectly... Two MBPs and one MP.

As for being glad still PPC, im wouldn't be after having the two things in my sig.

[cdembek]

Time Machine is STILL NOT WORKING!!!

[satcomer]

Time Machine is STILL NOT WORKING!!!

Download the Time Machine Buddy (http://www.apple.com/downloads/dashboard/status/timemachinebuddy.html) and see what the error is saying. This can help you in YOUR problem.

[neuropsychguy]

I've had 0 issues with SL so far (2008 white MacBook). Well, one non-essential VNC client does not work any more but that's not a big deal to me. I love SL.

[MrCrowbar]

I'm having issues with sound playback and audio/video sync. All videos played in Quicktime X are now seriously out of sync (fine at first, but then the video plays faster than the audio and you get a few seconds of difference) and when starting to play audio through any application, there's a loud crackling noise.

:-(

[Duncan-UK]

Just a quickie and I apologise if it comes across as a silly question.

I bought an 8 Core 2.26 Mac Pro a week before Snow Leopard was released, and transferred across all of my data and account information from my 2007 iMac.

Then when SL was released I upgraded via the "keep up to date" disc.

My question is - does the Mac Pro "think" that it is an iMac, as I transferred over all of my account information etc, and as such is this compromising the performance that I should be getting from a Mac Pro.

I think the answer is "no" as presumably the OS is identical whether it is running on a Mac Mini or a Mac Pro, and it uses the hardware that it finds.

My system is running fine, but I just wonder whether I should have not transferred the settings from the iMac and manually installed everything instead (which would have taken ages)

thanks in advance for any comments or assistance offered!

[Eric S.]

@ PPC people. Half the benefit to Snow Leopard was the fact PPC was dropped, file sizes wouldn't have changed much, optimisation wouldn't have been so great and basically us Intel owners would have been screwed over.

That's not true. Most of the disk space reduction in Snow Leopard comes from other optimizations, not from dropping PPC code. And in actual system operation it would matter not one bit to Intel users if PPC was still supported.

Apple's reasons for doing this have a lot more to do with their own operating budget, particularly for the QA resources it takes to test new releases on old HW. And since the old HW is really not providing any new revenue Apple would prefer to push people toward buying new HW.

Anyway it didn't just happen overnight; it's an ongoing process. First G3's were eliminated from new OS support, then one class of G4's, and now all PPC systems. And when 10.7 comes out it will probably only support 64-bit CPUs, eliminating early Intel systems.

Those people who bought top-of-the-line G5 systems three years ago are affected the most at present, but that's a relatively small number of Apple customers. So for them it's unfortunate but things just work out that way sometimes.

[AidenShaw]

The whole hardware being outdated thing reminds me of the initial switch to Vista.

No, it shouldn't. Vista didn't arbitrarily refuse to run on recent high end systems.

Vista's minimums are:

■1 GHz 32-bit (x86) or 64-bit (x64) processor
■512 MiB of system memory
■20 GB hard drive with at least 15 GB of available space
■Support for DirectX 9 graphics and 32 MiB of graphics memory
■DVD-ROM drive

Looking at a Fry's ad from early 2004, the $500 special is:

■2.7 GHz Pentium 4 processor
■512 MiB of system memory (up to 2 GiB supported)
■80 GB hard drive
■GMA with 32 MiB of graphics memory (open slot for discreet graphics card)
■DVD-ROM drive

So, if you had a three year old low end $500 PC you'd probably want to put some extra memory in for Vista - and maybe a graphics card (256 MiB GeForce AGP for $35 at Newegg) for the eye candy.

If you have a three year old top-of-the-line Apple PC, you're out of luck.

[jmpage2]

No, it shouldn't. Vista didn't arbitrarily refuse to run on recent high end systems.

Vista's minimums are:

■1 GHz 32-bit (x86) or 64-bit (x64) processor
■512 MiB of system memory
■20 GB hard drive with at least 15 GB of available space
■Support for DirectX 9 graphics and 32 MiB of graphics memory
■DVD-ROM drive

Looking at a Fry's ad from early 2004, the $500 special is:

■2.7 GHz Pentium 4 processor
■512 MiB of system memory (up to 2 GiB supported)
■80 GB hard drive
■GMA with 32 MiB of graphics memory (open slot for discreet graphics card)
■DVD-ROM drive

So, if you had a three year old low end $500 PC you'd probably want to put some extra memory in for Vista - and maybe a graphics card (256 MiB GeForce AGP for $35 at Newegg) for the eye candy.

If you have a three year old top-of-the-line Apple PC, you're out of luck.

While his purchase was 3 years ago, the model of PPC he bought was released almost four years ago.

If you go in and buy a model right before the refresh and know that the architecture that you are buying is completely going away, you can't exactly have a fit about it when they stop supporting you a few years down the line for completely new OS's.

Leopard runs fine on his machine, what exactly is he missing out on anyway?

[farleysmaster]

Could we please talk about PPCs in every thread? There must be a tangential way of linking them to every word in the dictionary.

Now can someone please tell me why my iPod touch is not booting up in 64-bit?

[gmcalpin]

My question is - does the Mac Pro "think" that it is an iMac, as I transferred over all of my account information etc, and as such is this compromising the performance that I should be getting from a Mac Pro.
The answer is no, and… yes, it's kind of a silly question. But there's no harm in that. :)

Click on your About This Mac (or look at the System Profiler). It should accurately reflect what you're using. If it doesn't, then that's seriously messed up, and you should definitely do a clean install, but I've never heard of that happening.

[AidenShaw]

While his purchase was 3 years ago, the model of PPC he bought was released almost four years ago.

Which is just as relevant as the fact that the Mac Pro case was designed 6 1/2 years ago. The purchase was 3 years ago.

I was commenting on the notion that dropping PPC support was comparable to Vista however, not on whether now was the right time to discontinue support PPC systems.

[jmpage2]

Which is just as relevant as the fact that the Mac Pro case was designed 6 1/2 years ago. The purchase was 3 years ago.

I was commenting on the notion that dropping PPC support was comparable to Vista however, not on whether now was the right time to discontinue support PPC systems.

You're missing the point. If people want to point out how easily (with RAM and video card upgrades) an older PC could run Windows 7 (the comparable release to Snow Leopard) then they should look at PCs that were being sold four years ago, not three.

While high end machines from four years ago could run Windows 7 without breaking a sweat, the majority of them would require hardware upgrades of some kind.

The bottom line is that computer technology changes rapidly. Architecture changes. There are probably people really angry and miffed that they can't get the new top of the line GPU in AGP form factor for their 2-3 year old motherboards.

In the case of Apple releasing Intel it should have been obvious to anyone with a remedial understanding of computers that it signaled the eventual death knell of PPC.

[bergmef]

When the PPC was bought, did Apple promise that it would run snow kitty?

I guess I should be pissed because my core duo won't freaking run in 64 bit mode.

[Eidorian]

Do you by chance have an external HD connected which contains an additional iTunes library? The stalling may be due to iTunes attempting to access external or redundant files located in secondary libraries.iTunes is stored locally on the internal hard drive.

[Azazyl]

So it was only 9.8 on my June MBP. It also disabled Candybar so it doesn't work now! Anyone else have this problem?

I am also having issues with CandyBar. Bought the software got to play with it for 10 minutes, updated to 10.6.1. And CandyBar was broke. I have contacted panic software and asked them what the deal is since they have not responded via twitter and have no info on the site. Seems odd to me to charge 30 bucks for a piece of software and that people seem to purchase quite often, and not check out new patches to the OS you develop for.

[twoodcc]

i wonder why the flash fix wasn't in the update summary. i still need to install it though

[matticus008]

I’ll agree that he’s overreacting…a lot. But I disagree with the idea that a three year old computer is ancient.
Ancient, no. But three years or three days after you buy something, a new feature or technology could be developed and introduced on new hardware.

The only guarantee you ever have when you buy something is that it does everything advertised, warrantied, and specified at the time of purchase. There is never any reliance on any future software updates being compatible, new features being supported in hardware, or anything else.

If it works, great. It changes nothing. That computer, bought more than a year after the announcement that PowerPC was being discontinued, still does absolutely everything it did when it shipped.

In fact, it has received about a dozen OS updates, and was perfectly in line with Intel software for almost three years after he bought it. It's not like he woke up the next day and nothing worked.

Years ago, I bought a Windows Mobile smartphone that couldn't be updated to the next released version less than a year after I bought it, even though it had sufficient specs. Microsoft discontinued support for the processor it had, and they did it concurrently with the release announcement--not four years ahead of time. You know what? It continued to work as well as it ever had long after that.
I don't see what the problem is - I use a G3 iMac running Tiger and a new 2.93GHz iMac running Snow Leopard. Apple releasing Snow Leopard only for Intel machines hasn't stopped my old G3 working just as well as it always has.
Exactly.

It doesn't make sense to expect post-sale improvements to products you buy. If it works as it was supposed to when you bought it, you got what you paid for. There are plenty of examples both directions in computing, both of decade-old technology being supported and of hardware just weeks old suddenly becoming obsolete. People tend to forget about the latter when they want to make themselves upset by creating false expectations.

[mgridgaway]

I just wanted to say that I've been using SL since near launch and haven't had any problems to date, aside from early adopter compatibility issues, which isn't really apple's fault.

As far as I'm concerned, any PPC should be running Tiger. It's solid (as a rock!) and you're not really missing out on much when it comes to Leopard.

Besides, anyone with half a sense in business should understand that this is basically a forced obsolescence to get PPC owners to jump on the Intel bandwagon. After all, Apple makes the bulk of its revenue from hardware sales.

[-js-]

To anyone with sense:

Please stop responding to HyperZboy. He's a troll, plain and simple. SL has nothing to do with PPC, yet here he is again, trolling. Just leave him be. Don't feed the trolls. Please. Just a suggestion.

[snakesqzns]

I don't understand why people are posting problems! I've been using thousands of Apple products for over 75 years and *not once* have they ever not operated with 100% perfection, filled my loins with vigor, and blessed me with unlimited happiness in all aspects of my existence.

Anyone posting otherwise is simply a troll or part of an insignificant vocal minority of extremist compulsive liars and M$ shills! :mad::mad::mad:

[avidmacuser]

What this update IS to me:
a) An excellent indication that apple is making efforts to quickly address and solve some of the problems introduced by a x.0 release
b) Further refinements to an operating system of and for the future. Perhaps not perfect today but it will get there progressively.


What this update IS NOT to me:
An ultimate and final fix for all issues users are experiencing. Although many, I have only experienced apparent issues with third party applications that may not yet be updated for Snow Leopard compatibility and prompt efforts from the developers would be appreciated and expected as we move forward.

I have now upgraded to SL as updates have been promptly issued for software I relied on in 10.5.x - Smooth sailing and impressive experience so far and no issues that I can report at this time, although I do wish that my less than one year old iMac would support OpenCL computing. Boo-hoo!

[Eric S.]

As far as I'm concerned, any PPC should be running Tiger. It's solid (as a rock!) and you're not really missing out on much when it comes to Leopard.

I run Leopard on my PowerMac G4 and it is solid as a rock, so that is bogus advice. And you are missing out on something huge between Tiger and Leopard: Time Machine.

[vohdoun]

As far as I'm concerned, any PPC should be running Tiger. It's solid (as a rock!) and you're not really missing out on much when it comes to Leopard.

Besides, anyone with half a sense in business should understand that this is basically a forced obsolescence to get PPC owners to jump on the Intel bandwagon. After all, Apple makes the bulk of its revenue from hardware sales.

Why must some people always preach this to others. Why should I be running Tiger when Leopard is doing things better for me and faster than what Tiger done for me since launch day. I'm still on the same install since the day it released.

Why must some people be such prats because there are PPC users out there...

Why do some other people feel the need to slag PPC users... have we not moved on from kindergarten schools yet. This isn't aimed at you but I've noticed this slagging lame trend has slowly been getting worse and it's aimed at some people in general that feel the need to make others feel what works for them may not work for you. It comes across as a dictatorship.

Why can't some people let others enjoy what they want to use rather than preach to them. What does it achieve, seriously... because some feel superior?...

[kavlo26]

SL has been running great for me. Installed the update, didn't notice a difference but nothing was broken for me in the first place.

[jb60606]

my 10.6.1 update was 60.4MB

[vevierta]

So I was wondering what you all thought of this update. I installed SL and was happy with the performance, but it seemed to screw up my battery life and what not. Are there any downsides to upgrading since I ended up reverting back to leopard?

Other than broken programs everyone seems to be getting great performance..any advice? Since it did rush off the floor, I assume it may be better to stay happy on Leopard until 10.6.666 comes out or something..?

[-js-]

I don't understand why people are posting problems! I've been using thousands of Apple products for over 75 years and *not once* have they ever not operated with 100% perfection, filled my loins with vigor, and blessed me with unlimited happiness in all aspects of my existence.

Anyone posting otherwise is simply a troll or part of an insignificant vocal minority of extremist compulsive liars and M$ shills! :mad::mad::mad:

Posting problems can be just fine--more than fine. Being unhappy with Apple can be just fine--more than fine. I am no apple fan boy. I think the keyboards that Apple made that shipped with the G4 era desktops were the worst keyboards ever made.

However, I wouldn't drop in on an OS X 10.6.1 thread and start complaining about the crappy keyboard that shipped with the blue and white G3 in the control room where I work. It would be out of place.

And HyperZboy's outbursts are indeed out of place in a snow leopard update thread. What do his issues have to do with Apple releasing 10.6.1?

Almost nothing direct.

Every freaking time there is an OS X update thread in this forum, HyperZboy shows up with his same issues. It's just not the place for them!

This thread should be a thread about THE UPDATE, and problems and experiences related to it. Some amount of Off Topic discussion is to be expected, but why do we always have to waste so much freaking time on this same discussion.

Look, just go back and reading the effing 10.5.8 update thread. You can find the exact same discussion.

Leopard works just fine on PPC computers. There are no significant issues with it that I have seen or experienced. Apple keeps both 10.5 and 10.4 updated as to security patches and the like. Yes, I'm sure PPC people would have preferred SL to be PPC and intel both, and I can sympathize with them. But, honestly, nothing has been taken away. Their computers still work just as good as they did before Snow Leopard was introduced.

But even if that's not correct, THIS IS NOT THE PLACE TO ARGUE ABOUT IT.

[Mr. Wonderful]

For all of the people that complain about not booting into 64-bit mode, if you were put in front of two computers, one running in 32-bit mode and the other in 64-bit mode, do you think you could tell the difference between the two? It really doesn't seem like something to get worked up about.
It's more the fact that my machine is PERFECTLY capable of running in 64-bit mode on my Unibody Macbook, but Apple is artificially gimping my system because it isn't technically in the "Pro" line. If I were running last year's 2.4Ghz Unibody Macbook, I would be pissed. It's not as if that model isn't a very capable machine, let alone my 2.0Ghz.

[hollywood084]

nice

[Sandpiper]

It's more the fact that my machine is PERFECTLY capable of running in 64-bit mode on my Unibody Macbook, but Apple is artificially gimping my system because it isn't technically in the "Pro" line. If I were running last year's 2.4Ghz Unibody Macbook, I would be pissed. It's not as if that model isn't a very capable machine, let alone my 2.0Ghz.

Why is this an issue? Unless you have over 92GB of ram or are working on kernel extensions there is no reason to run the 64-bit kernel.

[*LTD*]

I run Leopard on my PowerMac G4 and it is solid as a rock, so that is bogus advice. And you are missing out on something huge between Tiger and Leopard: Time Machine.

Agreed. Time Machine saved my ass a few times already. I've got Time Machine backups going back at least six months.

[Mr. Wonderful]

Things 10.6.1 did/might have fixed for me:
-Expose and Spaces are now smoother, possibly. Slow-down is a random occurrence.

Things 10.6.1 did/might have broke for me:
-Dock Expose, Expose, and Hot Corners are all broken with dual displays. To elaborate:
All types of Expose occur on the Macbook screen only, instead of sorted by what screen the window is on.
Hot Corners just don't work.
Expose will sporadically send the windows off the display to I don't know where.
-Safari will not delete cookies.

[Bubba Satori]

I have only been using SL for barely two days now since it came on my new MBP. I'm loving it so far. Lots of nice little changes and it seems very stable.

I didn't read the whole thread so I have no idea what people have been having problems with.

Here's a sample.

http://www.maclife.com/article/howtos/snow_leopard_killed_my_address_book

[Amdahl]

It doesn't make sense to expect post-sale improvements to products you buy. If it works as it was supposed to when you bought it, you got what you paid for. There are plenty of examples both directions in computing, both of decade-old technology being supported and of hardware just weeks old suddenly becoming obsolete. People tend to forget about the latter when they want to make themselves upset by creating false expectations.

See, this is kind of the opposite of how the computer industry has operated for decades. You CAN expect post-sale improvements, because of (bill gates voice)the magic of software.

People would pay a premium, expecting the computer to make it a little farther in to the future. Under the new Apple model, this is a mistake. Under the new Apple model, it is exactly like you say: Don't buy expecting improvements, because Apple won't be delivering. Or go Hackintosh.

[BRLawyer]

You mean having to type 6 4 when booting, etc?

Exactly. This means "arbitrarily blocking" in Aiden Shaw's eternally pro-Windows discourse... :rolleyes:

[BRLawyer]

Reading through this thread makes me kinda glad that I'm stuck with Leopard and PPC ;)

Don't be.

SL has been a clear example of bugless experience for me; everything acts faster and more fluid, not to mention the under-the-hood changes that will make even more difference as more programmers join in to GCD's open sourced approach.

The only issue I reported related to an inability to install iLife '09, which went right away afterwards, and for which there is already a fix for those still facing it (deletion of com.apple.HIToolbox files within ~-Preferences-ByHost).

[jjmancini]

Since the 10.6.1 update, I know some of us have been complaining that it has "broken" more applications.

In particular, 10.6 broke all mail plugins that had to do with viewing it widescreen.

Well, after a fix, 10.6.1 broke letterbox again. So I figured I would share a fix found here:

http://www.vanillahd.com/mac-apple/update-osx-10-6-1-update-kills-letterbox-for-apple-mail-no-worries-here-is-the-fix/

[*LTD*]

Exactly. This means "arbitrarily blocking" in Aiden Shaw's eternally pro-Windows discourse... :rolleyes:

There's a reason it boots into 32-bit mode by default. People DO realize this, right?

Or did Aiden mean "blocking" as in 64-bit is not available for older Intel hardware?

[*LTD*]

You could just get them off your Leopard disc.

OR . . .

Visit the manufacturer's website and just download the Leopard drivers. Might work.

Now my Brother HL-5370DW has complete, fully-featured drivers, and I can print in full HQ1200. Including duplexing. The works, really. I don't really need any Snow Leopard drivers now.

That was almost too easy.

[BRLawyer]

You could just get them off your Leopard disc.

OR . . .

Visit the manufacturer's website and just download the Leopard drivers. Might work.

Now my Brother HL-5370DW has complete, fully-featured drivers, and I can print in full HQ1200. Including duplexing. The works, really. I don't really need any Snow Leopard drivers now.

That was almost too easy.

Just check SU today: new printer drivers available.

[AidenShaw]

Or did Aiden mean "blocking" as in 64-bit is not available for older Intel hardware?

Yes - I thought that some x64-capable C2D and perhaps Xeon CPUs won't load the 64-bit Apple kernel even with the 6-4 salute, and that Windows x64 and 64-bit Linux will run on those machines. (Obviously the oldest Intel Apples are Core Duo and Core Solo systems, which have no x64 capability.)

If I'm mistaken, please correct me.

[*LTD*]

Just check SU today: new printer drivers available.

Oh yes, I've seen that bit of news. Very nice.

But for my model of laser printer (Brother HL-5370DW) I was informed by Brother that SL drivers will be out in October. Fair enough. I advised them that they could go ahead and tell their customers to try to get the drivers off their Leopard disc, provided they have it.

I just called them back today to let them know that the Leopard drivers on their website work like a charm, at least for this model. I daresay they could just push those out to Apple asap and all will be well.


Yes - I thought that some x64-capable C2D and perhaps Xeon CPUs won't load the 64-bit Apple kernel even with the 6-4 salute, and that Windows x64 and 64-bit Linux will run on those machines. (Obviously the oldest Intel Apples are Core Duo and Core Solo systems, which have no x64 capability.)

If I'm mistaken, please correct me.

Ah, I see. I thought you meant the whole holding down 6 4 business. My mistake.

[Eidorian]

Ah, I see. I thought you meant the whole holding down 6 4 business. My mistake.I held off my reply until Aiden came back but there are still models that you just can't boot into the 64-bit kernel under OS X due to the lack of kernel extensions and drivers. No amount of boot changes or 6+4 is going to do anything until Apple provides.

The blocking do appear to be arbitrary. My Macbook has the proper chipset and spits back EFI64. No 64-bit kernel for me.
This isn't the situation on the same hardware under Windows or Linux. 64-bit from top to bottom there.

[AidenShaw]

Exactly. This means "arbitrarily blocking" in Aiden Shaw's eternally pro-Windows discourse... :rolleyes:

Perfect example of the fanboi - dismiss the facts if they are not "pro-Apple", and attack the "troll" who dares to put facts on MacRumours....

Proof:
The blocking do appear to be arbitrary. My Macbook has the proper chipset and spits back EFI64. No 64-bit kernel for me.

This isn't the situation on the same hardware under Windows or Linux. 64-bit from top to bottom there.

[GroundLoop]

My wife just updated her 13" MBP and mail doesn't even start...

Looks like the installer forgot to update Mail.app altogether.

I have attached the error dialog. Once the dialog comes up, the only way to exit is via a force quit.

I will be downloading the installer from Apple and give it another shot.

Hickman

EDIT: The reinstall from the direct download worked (as I assumed it would). But it was interesting nonetheless.

[thecrackerjack]

I have an iMac with 10.5 this update pack killed my mac. It won't boot to the desktop anymore. I ran disk utility and repaired permissions, then restarted, then went and installed the updates. Now the system hangs on boot at the gray screen with the little gray pin wheel. Thanks alot apple.

[matticus008]

See, this is kind of the opposite of how the computer industry has operated for decades.
No, it's not.

There has never been any legitimate expectation for future upgrades unless explicitly promised at the time of sale.

Windows 95 didn't run on some systems less than 2 years old at the time of its release. Windows XP irrevocably broke plenty of up-to-date DOS-based applications (yes, they were still being updated, even in 2001). Symbian-based devices had all sorts of seemingly arbitrary cutoffs that didn't support devices still being sold at the time of a new release.

You have a selective memory. Backwards compatibility has never been anything other than a happy bonus, from any major vendor.
You CAN expect post-sale improvements, because of (bill gates voice)the magic of software.
No, you can't expect them. They often come, and companies make, unsurprisingly, a business decision about how much to invest in it. But that does not make a rational or legitimate expectation.

The computing industry has never conformed to your supposed MO. Hardware and software have always been at odds with each other in some way or another, because the "magic of software" can't overcome plain hardware limitations and changes.
People would pay a premium, expecting the computer to make it a little farther in to the future.
This statement makes absolutely no sense. Nobody paid a premium for future support commitments.
Or go Hackintosh.
...which wouldn't change a thing.

[AAPLaday]

Grrrrrr !


Installed ok, but Safari is now being a pain...

Was all running ok, I use bbc.co.uk as my homepage with my locale set it gives me local weather and news on the homepage. After the update It will not save my locale preference.. If I edit my locale it says that it is already set , but weather gives me London weather (300 miles away) and news just says "Set your location to receive local news". REALLY annoying !

Anyone know what might cause this? Was working perfectly well under Tiger, leopard 10.5.2 - 10.5.8 and Snow leopard 10.6.0..

Bri

This happened to me as well, i fixed it by going to BBC homepage and closing the weather section on it with the little cross at the top right. Then i selected reset homepage (at the top) and it now works for me :D

[BRLawyer]

Perfect example of the fanboi - dismiss the facts if they are not "pro-Apple", and attack the "troll" who dares to put facts on MacRumours....

Proof:

Ditto, you are the perfect example of a "fanboi" on the other side. At least Apple doesn't make you swallow 2 different kernels for the same OS or a billion different "marketed" versions like MS. And you what call "facts" is just your subjective appreciation of things, without any knowledge as to why Apple takes such technical or even business decisions for its consumer machines (the ones currently not able to use the currently-close-to-irrelevant 64-bit kernel).

So before you start spreading FUD and trolling your way around here again, here is some basic info from the very guy that released a freeware app to select the 64-bit Mac kernel:

Why would Apple do that?

The problem is compatibility with third-party drivers. Some programs are so deeply intertwined with the OS that they reach deeply into its bowels and modify its core, the kernel - these drivers are called kernel extensions (or kext).

Rule

A 32-bit processor can only run 32-bit stuff.
A 64-bit processor can run 32-bit and 64-bit stuff.
(stuff can be system, kernel, applications, drivers, etc)

So you need a 64-bit processor to run 64-bit anything

On a 64-bit processor:
A 32-bit Kernel can run both 32 and 64 bit applications.
A 64-bit Kernel can run both 32 and 64 bit applications.

A 32-bit Kernel can load only 32-bit kexts (kernel extensions).
A 64-bit Kernel can load only 64-bit kexts (kernel extensions).

If a program uses a 32-bit kernel extension (like the PC emulator VMware Fusion) then that extension will not run in a 64-bit kernel. So until they update their kext the program will not run if you start the kernel as 64-bit. However the program will run fine if the kernel stays 32-bit, even if the application itself is 64-bit)

The ability to start up with a 64-bit kernel (by holding 6 and 4 while booting) is meant for developer so they can start developing 64-bit kernel extensions. The average user never really 'needs' to be in 64-bit kernel - in fact, you wouldn't want to have a problem with your 32-bit kernel extension, would you?

So Apple leaves the kernel at 32-bit for now but includes the ability to start the kernel in 64-bit mode.

Unlike how other vendors have approached 64-bitness Apple's implementation will just work without worrying about whether you have 64-bit everything or not - just install and go ;-)

So if you really mean to be less of a hypocrite when participating in this forum, come back here when you have something positive to say about Apple. Otherwise just assume you enderlesque trolling position and stop pretending to have a "neutral" or "objective" approach to things.

[MrCrowbar]

Safari on Snow Leopard still gives me headaches. After a few minutes of surfing it's like the internet connection is interrupted. Reloading the page doesn't help, can't even open google in a new tab or anything. Always have to restart Safari.

Guess I'll have to use Firefox now :-(

[AidenShaw]

Apple doesn't make you swallow 2 different kernels for the same OS

:confused: The discussion is about the two different kernels for 10.6 - the x86 and x64 kernels....


...(the ones currently not able to use the currently-close-to-irrelevant 64-bit kernel).

Is a 15% performance boost between 10.6 x86 and 10.6 x64 "close to irrelevant"?

http://macperformanceguide.com/images-SnowLeopard/Graph-HeliconFocus411.gif

This graph is one of many from Mac OS X Snow Leopard — Performance (http://macperformanceguide.com/SnowLeopard-Performance.html), where they reach the conclusion that:

Apple’s decision to default Snow Leopard into 32-bit-kernel mode is a losing proposition for most photography related applications: boot into 64-bit mode if you don’t have any hardware/software that precludes it.

The only FUD is that the x64 kernel is "close to irrelevant". The performance benchmarks are showing that claim is false.

[*LTD*]

Hehe . . . I can tell I'm in 64-bit mode by the fact that my mouse is so slow. Steermouse isn't 64-bit yet. 64-bit version scheduled for sometime this month. I haven't tested other aspects yet. Printer is working fine, though.

[mrcmosx]

anyones update for 10.6.1 like 10 megs? i have the newest mac mini and had done all updates prior to new release

[*LTD*]

anyones update for 10.6.1 like 10 megs? i have the newest mac mini and had done all updates prior to new release

~ 9mb here, for an early 2008 MacBook Pro, 15-inch, 2.4ghz, w/4gb RAM.

[*LTD*]

:confused: The discussion is about the two different kernels for 10.6 - the x86 and x64 kernels....




Is a 15% performance boost between 10.6 x86 and 10.6 x64 "close to irrelevant"?

http://macperformanceguide.com/images-SnowLeopard/Graph-HeliconFocus411.gif

This graph is one of many from Mac OS X Snow Leopard — Performance (http://macperformanceguide.com/SnowLeopard-Performance.html), where they reach the conclusion that:

Apple’s decision to default Snow Leopard into 32-bit-kernel mode is a losing proposition for most photography related applications: boot into 64-bit mode if you don’t have any hardware/software that precludes it.

The only FUD is that the x64 kernel is "close to irrelevant". The performance benchmarks are showing that claim is false.

FWIW, here's the conclusion. To be fair, booting into 32-bit by default was a decision made, it seems, from a drivers perspective. Although I'm not sure the average user can easily figure out that they're in 32-bit mode, or that you need to hold down 6 4 during reboot. In any event, moving from 32-bit to full 64-bit was a tricky propostion all around. Shades of the move from OS 9 to OS X. Not every app will take advantage of 64-bit (a quick glance at the Activity Monitor will show this), and not all drivers will work right away (such as Steermouse.) Thankfully, printing seems unaffected (Brother laser printer using Leopard drivers from the Brother website. Fully-featured, too.)

I find it a bit odd, though, that access to 64-bit is achieved via such an obscure method. Why not a simple prompt at boot-up that can be toggled on/off via the Sys Prefs once the user has settled on their environment of choice? Why all the holding down 6 4 hocus-pocus?

Is there anyway to automatically boot into 64-bit all the time?

----------------------------------------


Conclusions

Snow Leopard booted into the 32-bit kernel is always faster than Leopard, with fair to substantial gains, depending on the application.

But Snow Leopard booted into the 64-bit kernel shows a consistent performance advantage over Leopard, and even more advantage over 32-bit Snow Leopard as well. Performance gains of up to 30% were observed, making Snow Leopard by far the best value for the money in a long, long time. At about $25 , you won’t find a more compelling upgrade of any kind, anywhere.

Apple’s decision to default Snow Leopard into 32-bit-kernel mode is a losing proposition for most photography related applications: boot into 64-bit mode if you don’t have any hardware/software that precludes it. See the software and hardware compatibility pages. Remember too that you can reboot to switch between 32-bit and 64-bit mode should you have programs or hardware that you need only sporadically.

[Mr. Wonderful]

Proof:
Likewise, Unibody Macbooks from last fall have the same motherboards as the Unibody Macbook Pros, but Apple won't allow normal Unibody Macbooks to boot into 64-bit mode. I hope 10.7 isn't 64-bit only, because Apple might be telling me right now that I'm screwed. And for those of you saying "64-bit doesn't matter," I would appreciate all the performance gains I can get to extend the life of my hardware. It's why I have my RAM maxed, an Intel SSD, etc. I also do some graphical design, which could always use a little boost, no matter how great one's hardware is.

And one thing I would like to correct about my problems with 10.6.1 that I posted yesterday: It's activating Spaces that makes all the windows fly off the screen, not Expose. And all my problems are fixed by unplugging and replugging in my Mini-Displayport cord every time my computer wakes up from sleep. Annoying, but worth it to get things working again.

[pizzacake]

Installed 10.6.1 on my 2.4GHz C2D iMac ~70 MB and on my 1.8GHz CD MacBook ~ 8 MB. Can't say I've noticed any performance difference on either since 10.6.1 from a clean install of 10.6. The only regression I've noticed since 10.5 is expose being choppy with 8 or more windows and other rare minor graphical glitches on my MacBook with Intel GMA 950 graphics, no problems noticed on my iMac with ATi 2600HD. Expose is still choppy on my MacBook with 10.6.1.

[AidenShaw]

Conclusions

Snow Leopard booted into the 32-bit kernel is always faster than Leopard, with fair to substantial gains, depending on the application.

But Snow Leopard booted into the 64-bit kernel shows a consistent performance advantage over Leopard, and even more advantage over 32-bit Snow Leopard as well. Performance gains of up to 30% were observed, making Snow Leopard by far the best value for the money in a long, long time. At about $25 , you won’t find a more compelling upgrade of any kind, anywhere.

Apple’s decision to default Snow Leopard into 32-bit-kernel mode is a losing proposition for most photography related applications: boot into 64-bit mode if you don’t have any hardware/software that precludes it. See the software and hardware compatibility pages. Remember too that you can reboot to switch between 32-bit and 64-bit mode should you have programs or hardware that you need only sporadically.

This is the complete "conclusions" section of the Mac OS X Snow Leopard — Performance (http://macperformanceguide.com/SnowLeopard-Performance.html) article, which I quoted a sentence from earlier....

(*LTD* didn't make it obvious which part was quoted...)


Is there anyway to automatically boot into 64-bit all the time?

Check out the article Mac OS X Snow Leopard — Booting into 64-bit mode (http://macperformanceguide.com/SnowLeopard-64bit.html) for a couple of ways to do this. This is a link in the performance article.

[*LTD*]

This is the complete "conclusions" section of the Mac OS X Snow Leopard — Performance (http://macperformanceguide.com/SnowLeopard-Performance.html) article, which I quoted earlier....

(*LTD* didn't make it clear which part was quoted...)




Check out the article Mac OS X Snow Leopard — Booting into 64-bit mode (http://macperformanceguide.com/SnowLeopard-64bit.html) for a couple of ways to do this. This is a link in the performance article.

From the same article, near the end:

If this makes you nervous, it should. This is the method I use, because I can leave it set the way I want to; having to hold down '6' and '4' keys at startup is absurd, it’s ridiculous that Apple did not provide a system preference pane for this.

As much as I love Apple and as much as I understand their concerns about drivers and the welfare of the average user, I have to agree with this. We've got a fully 64-bit OS, the performance gains of which far outclass the previous iteration of the OS, as well as the 32-bit mode of this OS, yet Apple has rendered the accessibility of all these gains a real pain. It's easy to hold down 6 and 4 but why should you? Give the user some graphical representations in the form of on-screen options at boot or at least a prefs pane, with some simple options to choose the operating environment of preference. This isn't "experimental" 64-bit. It's mainstream. Isn't that the whole point?

[Eric S.]

. . . Apple won't allow normal Unibody Macbooks to boot into 64-bit mode. I hope 10.7 isn't 64-bit only, because Apple might be telling me right now that I'm screwed.

And if that is the case, don't complain on MacRumors unless you're prepared for a ton of comments like this: "Stop whining. You knew this day was coming. You shouldn't expect a system to last more than three years. Get over it. You can't live in the past forever. You should have been saving up for a new system anyway."

[DMann]

Is there anyway to automatically boot into 64-bit all the time? There's an app for that: 32 or 64 bit Kernel Startup (http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/32252/32--or-64-bit-kernel-startup-mode-selector) This is much more convenient than aforementioned solutions, as it functions as well as a Preference Pane.

[Eidorian]

There's an app for that: 32 or 64 bit Kernel Startup (http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/32252/32--or-64-bit-kernel-startup-mode-selector) This is much more convenient than aforementioned solutions, as it functions as well as a Preference Pane.It really should have been a radio button in the Startup Disk System Perference pane. A nice little warning about what you're about to do would be nice.

Of course it would only be available on machines that are capable. Still Apple should have made it capable on all 64-bit machines.

[DMann]

It really should have been a radio button in the Startup Disk System Perference pane. A nice little warning about what you're about to do would be nice.

Of course it would only be available on machines that are capable. Still Apple should have made it capable on all 64-bit machines.One would imagine that they soon will, once most, or all, of the driver issues have been solved.

[Eidorian]

One would imagine that they soon will, once most, or all, of the driver issues have been solved.I don't have much hope but I know it's possible. The new GMA X3100 driver under 10.6.1 is a mess.

[djellison]

The one and only benefit I'd had with SL, was that with a nice clean install, Safari had stopped crashing several times a dat.

Now - with 10.6.1 - normal Leopard performance has been restored and it's crashing again.

AWESOME.

[*LTD*]

There's an app for that: 32 or 64 bit Kernel Startup (http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/32252/32--or-64-bit-kernel-startup-mode-selector) This is much more convenient than aforementioned solutions, as it functions as well as a Preference Pane.

Aha! Thank you!

[AidenShaw]

I hope 10.7 isn't 64-bit only, because Apple might be telling me right now that I'm screwed.

I would be very surprised if 10.7 isn't x64-only. Microsoft has stated that Windows 7 client is the last version of Windows that will support x86 systems (Windows 7 Server, formally known as "Windows Server 2008 R2", is x64 only). Apple can't be perceived as being behind Microsoft in cleaning out old cruft. ;)

I would also be surprised if the outrage over the lack of 64-bit support in 10.6 for x64-capable processors doesn't force Apple to update all C2D and Xeon systems with EFI64 firmware (after all, the "E" in "EFI" means "Extensible") and/or provide x64 driver support. It's simply inexcusable for Apple not to support the x64 kernel on Apple systems with x64-capable processors.

By the way, for all the people who criticize Microsoft for having an x86 DVD and a separate x64 DVD - for the next version of Windows it will be very simple for Microsoft to go x64-only - they don't need to make the x86 DVD. Since x86 and x64 are co-mingled on the Apple DVD, it won't be as simple to drop x86 support.

[Eidorian]

By the way, for all the people who criticize Microsoft for having an x86 DVD and a separate x64 DVD - for the next version of Windows it will be very simple for Microsoft to go x64-only - they don't need to make the x86 DVD. Since x86 and x64 are co-mingled on the Apple DVD, it won't be as simple to drop x86 support.Windows 7 has x86 and x64 on the same disc. We've been over this. :p

[PurrBall]

Windows 7 has x86 and x64 on the same disc. We've been over this. :p

No, it doesn't.

[Eidorian]

No, it doesn't.Can you provide proof?

[AidenShaw]

Windows 7 has x86 and x64 on the same disc. We've been over this. :p

No, it doesn't.

Can you provide proof?

We'll need to wait until later in October to answer this one....
_________________

The current .ISO files for the final Windows 7 kits on the Microsoft web sites have separate .ISO files for x86 and x64. Each easily fits on a single layer DVD.

Microsoft has shipped "combo" DVDs in the past that have included multiple DVD releases on one disc (the disc uses something like hard links so that only one copy of a file is on the DVD, even though each of the several kits on the DVD seems to have its own copy).

Whether it is shipped on one physical disc or two - it's logically two discs, there would be a boot-time menu to select the x86 or x64 kit.

While it seems clever that Apple is able to select x86 or x64 at boot time (whereas Windows requires one to install both systems and dual-boot between different partitions), the Windows approach is cleaner. There is no need in Windows to compromise anything for 32-bit compatibility - Windows x64 is true 64-bit top-to-bottom.

[JFreak]

One would imagine that they soon will, once most, or all, of the driver issues have been solved.

You mean iPhone, right? :)

[celtikmind]

You could just get them off your Leopard disc.

OR . . .

Visit the manufacturer's website and just download the Leopard drivers. Might work.

Now my Brother HL-5370DW has complete, fully-featured drivers, and I can print in full HQ1200. Including duplexing. The works, really. I don't really need any Snow Leopard drivers now.

That was almost too easy.

This really made me laugh... One of MR's most obvious Mac fanatics telling the MR crowd that 'just download the drivers from the manufacturer's website' is too easy?!?!

Not 'Windowish' at all... oh no, I assure you. Seems you have some fractures in your RDF there... :rolleyes:

Either way, have a friendly thanks for the laugh! :D

[*LTD*]

This really made me laugh... One of MR's most obvious Mac fanatics telling the MR crowd that 'just download the drivers from the manufacturer's website' is too easy?!?!

Not 'Windowish' at all... oh no, I assure you. Seems you have some fractures in your RDF there... :rolleyes:

Either way, have a friendly thanks for the laugh! :D

If you don't have a drivers CD for you printer, or if you've lost it, or if the drivers that came with your printer are not up to date, you'll need to download them anyway. Quite often the manual for the product will advise the user to visit their website.

But I suppose inserting the CD that came with your product is alright (provided it has one), but pointing your browser to the manufacturer's website, selecting your product and OS, and then hitting "download" isn't.

[Winni]

At the current rate, Apple could immediately cease OS development for a decade and still be ahead of Microsoft in the operating systems "race."

That's true. Snow Leopard already is much more unstable and unreliable than even Windows 95 could ever have dreamed to be.

Just for the statistics, it seems to be impossible for applications like Pages 09 to save a document in Snow Leopard without crashing. Same goes for Photoshop CS3, but we've already heard how lousy supported that is. I'm pissed because both apps crashed on me four times during my lunch break today when I wanted to write a small letter with a JPEG in it.

While Microsoft has worked extremely hard on their QA, Apple seemingly just has let go and doesn't care for QA anymore at all. Their products no longer "just work", nowadays they begin to "just suck".

Windows 7 Beta was more pleasure to use than Apple's RELEASED and already patched Snow Leopard is. In my book, Snow Leopard is a huge fail, and I'm tempted to either revert to Leopard or - if it wasn't for the huge investments into OS X software that I've made - switch back to Windows entirely.

Over the last four years, Apple has done a great job at convincing me that Microsoft produces the better platform.

[diamond.g]

We'll need to wait until later in October to answer this one....
_________________

The current .ISO files for the final Windows 7 kits on the Microsoft web sites have separate .ISO files for x86 and x64. Each easily fits on a single layer DVD.

Microsoft has shipped "combo" DVDs in the past that have included multiple DVD releases on one disc (the disc uses something like hard links so that only one copy of a file is on the DVD, even though each of the several kits on the DVD seems to have its own copy).

Whether it is shipped on one physical disc or two - it's logically two discs, there would be a boot-time menu to select the x86 or x64 kit.

While it seems clever that Apple is able to select x86 or x64 at boot time (whereas Windows requires one to install both systems and dual-boot between different partitions), the Windows approach is cleaner. There is no need in Windows to compromise anything for 32-bit compatibility - Windows x64 is true 64-bit top-to-bottom.
If it is anything like Windows 2008 it will have both on one disk. Especially since the key is good for either version (x64 or x86).

[*LTD*]

That's true. Snow Leopard already is much more unstable and unreliable than even Windows 95 could ever have dreamed to be.

Just for the statistics, it seems to be impossible for applications like Pages 09 to save a document in Snow Leopard without crashing. Same goes for Photoshop CS3, but we've already heard how lousy supported that is. I'm pissed because both apps crashed on me four times during my lunch break today when I wanted to write a small letter with a JPEG in it.

Pages 09 is all I use for word processing, and even the odd layout. I've been saving documents with it in SL since I installed SL on release day. Not a single crash. The Snow Leopard Box Set *comes with* iWork. iWork has been tested with SL.

But I guess it only "seems" to be impossible, when it actually isn't.

And CS3 runs fine on SL. Adobe wants you to buy CS4. This is to be expected.

While Microsoft has worked extremely hard on their QA, Apple seemingly just has let go and doesn't care for QA anymore at all. Their products no longer "just work", nowadays they begin to "just suck".

Windows 7 Beta was more pleasure to use than Apple's RELEASED and already patched Snow Leopard is. In my book, Snow Leopard is a huge fail, and I'm tempted to either revert to Leopard or - if it wasn't for the huge investments into OS X software that I've made - switch back to Windows entirely.

Over the last four years, Apple has done a great job at convincing me that Microsoft produces the better platform.

I've bolded my answer above.

That's interesting, because since 2006, Apple has never done better. Macs have never been more popular, and customers have never been more satisfied. Snow Leopard has had a successful release. For the vast majority, printers have been the odd issue, if at all. There is no widespread grumbling or hand-wringing. SL isn't the butt of media jokes. There aren't an ocean of horrible reviews. This isn't Vista. Not by a long shot. In fact, SL has not only been well-received, but praised almost universally. There will be a minority, particularly on obscure tech/fansites, that will complain, and always complain. They should file bug reports accordingly, like anyone else.

It's one thing to relate a negative personal experience to everyone, or a set of negative personal experiences. It's another thing entirely to attempt to use that as a reflection of actual reality, when the actual reality is the exact opposite.

[iBookG4user]

That's true. Snow Leopard already is much more unstable and unreliable than even Windows 95 could ever have dreamed to be.

Just for the statistics, it seems to be impossible for applications like Pages 09 to save a document in Snow Leopard without crashing. Same goes for Photoshop CS3, but we've already heard how lousy supported that is. I'm pissed because both apps crashed on me four times during my lunch break today when I wanted to write a small letter with a JPEG in it.

While Microsoft has worked extremely hard on their QA, Apple seemingly just has let go and doesn't care for QA anymore at all. Their products no longer "just work", nowadays they begin to "just suck".

Windows 7 Beta was more pleasure to use than Apple's RELEASED and already patched Snow Leopard is. In my book, Snow Leopard is a huge fail, and I'm tempted to either revert to Leopard or - if it wasn't for the huge investments into OS X software that I've made - switch back to Windows entirely.

Over the last four years, Apple has done a great job at convincing me that Microsoft produces the better platform.

Well, I used windows 7 for 2 days and in those 2 days I've had 3 blue screens of death and many program crashes (I've gotten a lot of "Application stopped working", very annoying!). While with Snow Leopard I've not had any bad issues, the only bugs that I've run into have been very small UI bugs. I'd say that small UI bugs are a heck of a lot better than complete system crashes. Especially when you have more said complete system crashes than the number of days you've used the OS!

[BongoBanger]

That's interesting, because since 2006, Apple has never done better. Macs have never been more popular, and customers have never been more satisfied. Snow Leopard has had a successful release. For the vast majority, printers have been the odd issue, if at all. There is no widespread grumbling or hand-wringing. SL isn't the butt of media jokes. There aren't an ocean of horrible reviews. This isn't Vista. Not by a long shot.

I agree with the point about it not being a disastrous launch like Vista's and that Apple have done well over the 2006-2009 period but it sometimes feels like they're at the crest of a wave and it's only down from here.

SL has been released to some pretty faint applause in general and there seems to be a lot more buzz and excitement around W7. This may, of course, be from the fact that SL is merely an evolution of a very well perceived OS whereas W7 is an evolution of a very poorly perceived one but the point still stands true.

If it's one thing that history's taught us it's that past performance is no indicator of future performance.

Well, I used windows 7 for 2 days and in those 2 days I've had 3 blue screens of death and many program crashes (I've gotten a lot of "Application stopped working", very annoying!). While with Snow Leopard I've not had any bad issues, the only bugs that I've run into have been very small UI bugs. I'd say that small UI bugs are a heck of a lot better than complete system crashes. Especially when you have more said complete system crashes than the number of days you've used the OS!

In fairness you're either using the Beta or an RC not the finished product. What were you running it on? It's unusual for the 6 series kernel Windows systems to completely kill your system these days.

[*LTD*]

Brother printer drivers have just been released, for anyone interested. They'll show up via software update.

I believe Canon drivers were made available last week, as well as HP.

I think Lexmark drivers are still due as well as Epson.

[AidenShaw]

Brother printer drivers have just been released, for anyone interested. They'll show up via software update.

I believe Canon drivers were made available last week, as well as HP.

I think Lexmark drivers are still due as well as Epson.

No problems here with HP and Epson drivers, found and automatically installed...

... on Windows 7 RTM.

[KnightWRX]

SL has been released to some pretty faint applause in general and there seems to be a lot more buzz and excitement around W7. This may, of course, be from the fact that SL is merely an evolution of a very well perceived OS whereas W7 is an evolution of a very poorly perceived one but the point still stands true.

If it's one thing that history's taught us it's that past performance is no indicator of future performance.

Another thing history has taught us is that pre-launch hype never actually materializes on the shipping discs.

Seriously, people were hyping the crap out of Vista too and look what happened there. In the end, Windows is still Windows, no matter how crappy they make their taskbar look.

[AidenShaw]

Another thing history has taught us is that pre-launch hype never actually materializes on the shipping discs.

Yes, as clearly evidenced when 10.6 shipped. Meh....

[MartiNZ]

Biggest annoyance in SL just came back to me yet again: broken sorting in stacks in list view.

How they do such a thing in an update I don't know, but boy is it a pain. Obviously not a priority though as it has been broken since at least the wwdc build.

[BongoBanger]

Another thing history has taught us is that pre-launch hype never actually materializes on the shipping discs.

Seriously, people were hyping the crap out of Vista too and look what happened there. In the end, Windows is still Windows, no matter how crappy they make their taskbar look.

Perhaps, however Vista is massively better than XP and I expect W7 to be a further improvement on Vista. The end code reviews are certainly far more favourable than Vista's.

SL just seems a bit half finished to me as if it was rushed out the door with the intention to complete it by a series of point releases.

[fultonteri]

Hi Everyone..

I did a fresh install of 10.6 and Aperture 2.1.4.
and the system is very slow. Sometimes it needs 5 to 10 Minutes to did setings like Saturaion +0,1,

What can I do?
Thanks.

[chrono1081]

Any help with Internet Sharing? My home network has been a token ring since the SL update-- whatever machine holds the token must reboot.

I've never had a problem with internet sharing in snow leopard. Works just fine for me. I'm not sure why everyone was having problems.

[EyeintheSky]

Curious thing happened to me today with this "Security" update.

My work Mac is older as I am cheap and believe in the stability of the PowerPC and 10.4.11. When software update popped up today with itunes, quicktime and Security Update 2009-005, I told it to get going. However, when I returned to the screen I saw it had aborted halfway or so through the security update. It gave a message that it was in the trash, so I emptied, restarted as prompted and got ready to give it another go. Except that it won't load it, not through software update (doesn't even list it now) or manual download from the server. No clue why.

Meanwhile, my beautifully stable 10.4.11 has gone AWOL. Now it wont run half of the Finder features including hot corners, menu bar, restart, shutdown, and a list of others. And all the folder label colors are grey. I'm a mac man for life, but no tech wiz, and am stumped. Never seen anything like this before. TechTool just scratched it's head at it.

Any thoughts?