All the Snow Leopard hate is hype, right?

[maflynn]

I wouldn't consider all of the hate towards SL to be hype. Clearly there are those that have had a very difficult time with the upgrade. For me, I had a couple of bumps in the road - my printer didn't work initially. For the majority of users it works well. For others, not so much and it can be very frustrated.

 

[MisterMe]

...

I'm gonna take a wild guess and say you've never owned an Apple laptop.

If I ignore my PowerBook Pismo (currently running MacOS X 10.4.11), which is still going strong, and my early 2009 17" MacBook Pro, currently running MacOS X 10.6.1, then you would be correct. In the interest of full disclosure, the Pismo belongs to my employer--although I provide all of its support--but the MBP is mine, all mine.

 

[kate-willbury]

Out of curiosity, what did the last Windows update cost?

windows updates don't cost anything.

 

[atheros07]

I've had Snow Leopard 10.6.1 now for 10 days, and it feels as rock-solid as Leopard ever was. Safari in particular has been much speedier and has survived through heavy surfing these 10 days without a hiccup, whereas in Leopard it would crash every 4 days or so.

I also like the small UI changes-- unless something disastrous happens, I could never go back to 10.5.8.

 

[thejadedmonkey]

Given this thread, I would have to say that some of the hate is justified. Remember, hype of any sort has to come from somewhere...

 

[madog]

I never understood why people were going bonkers over "clean" installs. Seems like those people have the most problems.

Because they're not doing them right. Having 100 applications and data from previous installs/users/apps/downloads that have accumulated over the years, and just migrating all that same data back over isn't really a clean install. Kind of like buying a new car only to transfer all the old oil, gas, other fluids, trash from the back seat, and other garbage from your old one.

Or, having a whole bunch of third party system applications and reinstalling them once the new system is installed without checking for compatibility.

The only true way is a clean install when done properly.

 

[Amdahl]

This is called the "Placebo Effect." Bear in mind, placebos don't work. I have been a Mac user for more than 20 years. Having actually benchmarked Mac before and after defrags, the differences in performance were in the noise.

I'm with sputacus. It is not a placebo effect. Fragmentation is known fact; it is a known fact OS X only defragments files smaller than 20MB, and does not defragment the free space.

Only a person deeply affected by the Reality Distortion Field can believe that defragmentation is of no benefit, when Windows has a built in defragger, and it has run automatically since Vista.

And no, HFS+ is not more advanced than NTFS. HFS+ is an old file system. Early versions of NT did do a poor job of allocating space in NTFS, but that is not an inherent problem with NTFS, and it was fixed 10 years ago with Windows 2000 (NT 5.0).