Mac OS X Leopard Reviews: NY Times, Wall Street Journal, USA Today

[MacRumors]

Apple has seeded the usual technology reviewers with early copies of Mac OS X Leopard for review. The reviews were published tonight. Overall, Leopard is described to be a solid upgrade with only minor bugs encountered in the testing by the reviewers. David Pogue specifically states that he was using the final version of Leopard for a week prior to the review. Compatibility with existing applications is also described as good, and upgrades from existing Tiger installs appeared to go smoothly.

NYTimes - David Pogue
• "The most serious misstep in Leopard is its new see-through menus. .... Often, Apple’s snazzy graphics are justifiable because they make the Mac more fun to use. In this case, though, nothing is gained, and much is lost."
• "Otherwise, the only cause for pause is the usual minor set of 1.0 bugs, which Apple generally fixes with software updates after a major release."
• "Leopard is powerful, polished and carefully conceived. Happy surprises, and very few disappointments, lie around every corner."

Wall Street Journal - Walt Mossberg
• "I did notice a few drawbacks, but they were minor."
• "In fact, every piece of software and hardware I tried on two Leopard-equipped Macs -- a loaned laptop from Apple and my own upgraded iMac -- worked fine, exhibiting none of the compatibility problems that continue to plague Vista."
• "Leopard isn't a must-have for current Mac owners, but it adds a lot of value."

USA Today - Edward Baig
• "I migrated to Leopard from the last OS X version, Tiger, without pain on a MacBook laptop and my own iMac desktop"

Apple is launching Mac OS X Leopard on Friday, October 26th at 6 p.m. There have been a few scattered reports that Mac OS X Leopard has already arrived in the hands of some lucky customers today, but no unboxing photos have yet been published or submitted.

Article Link

[That-Is-Bull]

Originally Posted by Macrumors

The most serious misstep in Leopard is its new see-through menus.

"New see-through menus" like the ones in Tiger, or is he talking about the menu bar? Either way, good to see the biggest problem with Leopard is a minor aesthetic difference.

[arn]

Originally Posted by That-Is-Bull

"New see-through menus" like the ones in Tiger, or is he talking about the menu bar? Either way, good to see the biggest problem with Leopard is a minor aesthetic difference.

He's talking about this I believe. Which exists in Tiger, but perhaps to a lesser degree.

[Sky Blue]

i love the comment on the picture in the NY Times article..someone wasn't paying attention

[Jetson]

Leopard is finally here!

It's been a long time coming, but I'm sure it'll be worth the wait.

[powermac_daddy]

people are making this as a huge deal. it's big, but chill out. i am getting it in Dec...

[cohibadad]

FWIW I have never noticed the translucent menus on the Leopard seeds. The older translucent menu bar was much more translucent but the latest is completely readable and I have desktop images cycling every 5 seconds.

[irahodges]

Originally Posted by arn

He's talking about this I believe. Which exists in Tiger, but perhaps to a lesser degree.

I know it is more translucent, but I believe it appears much more translucent than Tiger because they got rid of the pin stripes.

EDIT: After looking at Tiger's menu for a while, the horizontal pinstripes definitely help to direct your attention back to the text.

[Marvy]

Originally Posted by arn

He's talking about this I believe. Which exists in Tiger, but perhaps to a lesser degree.

Wow, I never noticed that in the screenshots before: Is it just the image compression, or is the background behind the menu actually blurred out? No wonder Leopard requires a powerful mac. Looks cool though.

[cohibadad]

Originally Posted by Marvy

Wow, I never noticed that in the screenshots before: Is it just the image compression, or is the background behind the menu actually blurred out? No wonder Leopard requires a powerful mac. Looks cool though.

it is blurred behind the menu. If you look close when you close a menu the image behind it stays blurred for a split second.

[offwidafairies]

Originally Posted by arn

He's talking about this I believe. Which exists in Tiger, but perhaps to a lesser degree.

those pics look shite
hmmm i find transluceny annoying most of the time. especially text on text
looks ok when its graphic on text or visa versa

[hugodrax]

Originally Posted by That-Is-Bull

"New see-through menus" like the ones in Tiger, or is he talking about the menu bar? Either way, good to see the biggest problem with Leopard is a minor aesthetic difference.

the menus on the menu-bars, they are too opaque in my opinon I am running leopard on my work mac pro.

[motulist]

Originally Posted by hugodrax

the menus on the menu-bars, they are too opaque in my opinon I am running leopard on my work mac pro.

Too opaque? I've never ever heard anyone complain that the menus are too opaque. Are you sure you don't mean you think they're too transparent? Just checking.

opaque=NOT see through, like a wall.
transparent= CAN be seen through, like glass.

[liberty4all]

I find it unacceptable that Apple would try to stop the install of 10.5 on any G4, or G3 for that matter -- if someone wants to install, let them -- give a warning on requirements, but don't put in roadblocks.

The big problem is Apple never fully optimizes any hardware, because any gains are taken away by more feature fluff negating improvements. What they should do is allow the user to shut off the fluff, so 10.5 can run just fine on saw a G4 Sawtooth...

Sheesh!

[mashinhead]

i have to admit i hate walt mossberg. I don't know why exactly. He's so smug. He reminds me of an insect or a bug.

[HLdan]

Originally Posted by liberty4all

I find it unacceptable that Apple would try to stop the install of 10.5 on any G4, or G3 for that matter -- if someone wants to install, let them -- give a warning on requirements, but don't put in roadblocks.

The big problem is Apple never fully optimizes any hardware, because any gains are taken away by more feature fluff negating improvements. What they should do is allow the user to shut off the fluff, so 10.5 can run just fine on saw a G4 Sawtooth...

Sheesh!

Unfortunately I have to disagree with you on this. Remember the iPhone disaster? Apple gave a warning of what might happen and nearly everyone went against their warning and jacked up their iPhone. Now say if installing Leopard on unsupported systems cause a loss of files then there will be some unhappy Mac customers. It's best to block installation rather than deal with lawsuits.

[irahodges]

Originally Posted by liberty4all

I find it unacceptable that Apple would try to stop the install of 10.5 on any G4, or G3 for that matter -- if someone wants to install, let them -- give a warning on requirements, but don't put in roadblocks.

The big problem is Apple never fully optimizes any hardware, because any gains are taken away by more feature fluff negating improvements. What they should do is allow the user to shut off the fluff, so 10.5 can run just fine on saw a G4 Sawtooth...

Sheesh!

I have a 933 mhz quicksilver running as my media server. It is older than a sawtooth, and it meets apple's requirements. What are you complaining about?

[whoami]

Originally Posted by irahodges

I have a 933 mhz quicksilver running as my media server. It is older than a sawtooth, and it meets apple's requirements. What are you complaining about?

WTF are you talking about, 933 quicksilver older than a sawtooth!! lol
do you even know what a sawtooth is?
Apple clearly states that a G4 867 is the requirement.

[irahodges]

Originally Posted by whoami

WTF are you talking about, 933 quicksilver older than a sawtooth!! lol
do you even know what a sawtooth is?
Apple clearly states that a G4 867 is the requirement.

my mistake, i was thinking about the mirrored-door powermac...slipped my mind....you can continue being mad at Apple, but I would suggest getting a new computer

[hugodrax]

Originally Posted by liberty4all

I find it unacceptable that Apple would try to stop the install of 10.5 on any G4, or G3 for that matter -- if someone wants to install, let them -- give a warning on requirements, but don't put in roadblocks.

The big problem is Apple never fully optimizes any hardware, because any gains are taken away by more feature fluff negating improvements. What they should do is allow the user to shut off the fluff, so 10.5 can run just fine on saw a G4 Sawtooth...

Sheesh!

10.5 is snappier than tiger on my Work mac pro and you will really notice a huge difference when you are running lots of apps and tying up the ram. 10.5 is faster and I suspect lots of things under the hood were optimized.

[Stella]

Sounds like solid reviews.

Maybe 10.5 isn't the upgrade that others have been, but still, we'll see the full benefits in the future as developers start to utilitise the new set of API that 10.5 offers.

Glad to hear its ( probably ) not the disaster of Vista...

[chelsel]

How could he say there are "no more ways to organize photos"... I can't wait for automatic tagging based on content... you know, when your Apple recognizes the picture of your dog and automatically categorizes, Dog, Fido, Pet, etc.

That's an advancement... see through menus, bah :-)

[Quillz]

Originally Posted by Stella

Sounds like solid reviews.

Maybe 10.5 isn't the upgrade that others have been, but still, we'll see the full benefits in the future as developers start to utilitise the new set of API that 10.5 offers.

Glad to hear its ( probably ) not the disaster of Vista...

Vista wasn't a disaster, despite what a very small minority of vocal bloggers would like you to believe.

[hugodrax]

Parallels works fine also, I have two virtual XP full screen desktops one of them is connected to an airgapped network and I used nic 2 for it. Its real cool to crtl-arrow. people get a kick out of watching me operate using 6 spaces and a **** load of OS X,unix apps and two virtuals Oh and terminal got a nice overhaul I love the enhancements and I kicked iTerm to the curb.

I abused leopard and its pretty tight for a beta. So I suspect it will be a reliable product for end users.

[Stella]

Originally Posted by Quillz

Vista wasn't a disaster, despite what a very small minority of vocal bloggers would like you to believe.

LOL - 'vocal bloggers'. Err, how about mainstream press?

- microsoft having to extend the life of XP
- PC stores reporting lower than expected profits - due to low take up of Vista
- software not working
- hardware not working / drivers not ready for Vista release
- PC sellers / manufacturers asked to ship XP instead of Vista
- Consumer associations boycotting Vista

Stories:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,13...1/article.html
http://www.channelregister.co.uk/200..._profits_down/
http://www.news.com/Microsoft-extend...3-6210524.html
http://tech.yahoo.com/blogs/null/47939
http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=543
http://www.channelregister.co.uk/200..._declares_war/

Thats just less than 5 minutes searching. Hardly small vocal bloggers. There are articles from mainstream newspapers too ( fact, not opinion ).

Vista has hardly been a roaring success....