Apple Releases Mac OS X 10.5.8

[Eidorian]

RIIGGGHHHT! That's exactly what I said. Okay, well I won't be replying to you anymore. I notice this in several posts across MR, I mistakenly get started with what seems to be a civil and fair argument only to be caught in your tangled web of fights.

Well I don't know how many items are in your folders or how many it will take before Stacks slows to a crawl. I have never had any problems with Stacks on my lowly MacBook with GMA X3100 and a 5400 RPM drive. Then again I don't have more than 20 items in my stacks to begin with. There are still some weird issues in Finder where it'll just beachball.

Apple drags the old horse of "We've got it optimized this time!" every time there's a new version of OS X coming out. 10.0 to 10.2 was the most dramatic for basic responsiveness. The PowerPC 74xx hit its peak under Tiger and the G5 got a much needed boost under Leopard. Even the fan controller and thermal profiles!

You'll even get some users around here still asking why the Core Duo is supported under Snow Leopard. It makes you wonder with the lack of 64-bit drivers across the board. Maybe in 10.7 I'll get my GMA X3100 64-bit drivers. I waited so long for Santa Rosa to get kicked to the curb by Apple. You can tell from my rage.

The Power Mac G5 was sold until mid 2006 and lets not forget refurbished models afterward. I would be fun to find the last PowerPC machine on earth covered until 2010 under AppleCare.

 

[macintoshtoffy]

Well when a PPC Mac is still a viable system and only 3 years old I'd be mad too...

*YOU* bought a machine knowing full well a year before purchasing it that it was going to be replaced with an Intel version of it. Are you that impatient that you couldn't wait for the Intel version to come out?

That is the question - not about PowerPC support but why you made a purchasing decision on a product even though you knew it was the end of the line.

Using your logic, I should complain that the SGI O2 I used to own no longer receives free updates even though SGI made it quite clear that MIPS has been a dead product for over 5 years!

I mean I have a 7 year old PC that will run Windows 7 when it comes out

And Microsoft has moved from and to how many architectures? talk about grasping at straws by using a broken analogy on your part.

why shouldn't PPC Mac users with relatively new hardware not be mad that OS support will soon be a thing of the past for them?

Because they're two different architectures; you can't compare a 7 year old machine of the same architecture to a machine of today of the same architecture. It's a stupid comparison.

 

[oscarmacca]

Damn it

As stated by me and others a couple of times you just need to let it go. It has to inspect your entire backup to figure out where it is and what to do next.

Many thanks to Blaat Mekker, Time Machine has now started backing up after I left it to 'prepare' for a good 90 minutes.

Good tip.

 

[Eidorian]

Many thanks to Blaat Mekker, Time Machine has now started backing up after I left it to 'prepare' for a good 90 minutes.

Good tip.

I had repair my Time Machine disk last night. Not because of 10.5.8 specifically but it gets annoying when you spend 10 minutes preparing for a 21 MB backup because of "Node requires deep traversal".

I'd give that a look under Disk Utility.

 

[AppleMatt]

None of these excuses or comments are valid reasons why Apple cannot compile a pretty similar version of Snow Leopard for POWERPC minus maybe 1 or 2 features. The idea that Snow Leopard could not possibly run on PowerPC Macs has been thoroughly debunked by tons of people smarter than me.
Some of SL's new features won't even run on many INTEL Macs!

blah blah blah ranty rant rant

If Leopard is already so bloated, then Apple should fix it for BOTH INTEL and POWERPC!

We ALL paid the SAME $129!​

If 10.5.8 is the end of the road for Leopard, I think lots of Mac users are going to be pissed, not just me.

Many, including me, have replied to your rants but you ignore them and instead quote irrelevant posts to harp on about the same damn thing. We hear you; you're unhappy about Snow Leopard being Intel only. Thanks for your input.

You're just a spammer, destroying otherwise interesting discussion threads with the same crap posted in bold/centered/excessive !!!!!!!!!!'s. It astounds me that you haven't been banned yet.

10.0 to 10.2 was the most dramatic for basic responsiveness.

Absolutely agree, although I felt that 10.2 > 10.3 was the best upgrade for me; a leap in performance and also it finally felt 'finished'.

The question is, did they do better work in improving back then or was it just so bad to begin with they've already picked the low hanging fruit. I too would like to see massive gains. Snow Leopard is definitely faster, but it's not an 'oh wow' when you turn the machine on, rather you notice it more when you go back to Leopard. At the moment my primary concern is whether the 8800 GS in the 2008 iMac supports OpenCL. I can't see why it wouldn't; I believe it's a repackaged 8800 GT and NVIDIA say it supports it but Apple don't list it on their OpenCL page.

AppleMatt

 

[CQd44]

This update almost broke my hackintosh D:

Luckily, I know how to use nano and lspci and what extensions to modify.

:]

 

[Max Miles]

This Blows.. my wireless is frucked now unless I'm plugging into my power adaptor. Thanks Apple.

 

[CQd44]

This Blows.. my wireless is frucked now unless I'm plugging into my power adaptor. Thanks Apple.

You could try editing a kext in your /System/Library/Extensions folder!

 

[macintoshtoffy]

I came late to the mac party - been a user for only 3 years and so was always on intel mac. I'm just wondering however - it seems to me that the number of PPC mac users at this point must be pretty small. If I had to guess, I'd guess maybe 10% of installed base. Anyone have a more specific number? just curious.

To me, I think ongoing support for an obsolete system is too much to ask past this point. Intel code should be optimized and resources martialed to that end, PPC is over, that's a simple fact.

My first Mac was a G4 eMac, them moved to a G5 iMac, then to a MacBook + iMac. I tend to run on a 2 1/2 - 3 year cycle, depending on the nature of the upgrade. If the upgrade isn't significant enough to justify the expense - I wait till something released that is.

I find it interesting that people complain about 'upgrading' and yet if they closely examined their life and what they spend their money on - if they consolidated all the money they frittered away over 3 years, they could easily upgrade their computer.

 

[dave12345]

You could try editing a kext in your /System/Library/Extensions folder!

do you care to enlighten us ...

 

[HyperZboy]

*YOU* bought a machine knowing full well a year before purchasing it that it was going to be replaced with an Intel version of it. Are you that impatient that you couldn't wait for the Intel version to come out?

That is the question - not about PowerPC support but why you made a purchasing decision on a product even though you knew it was the end of the line.

Using your logic, I should complain that the SGI O2 I used to own no longer receives free updates even though SGI made it quite clear that MIPS has been a dead product for over 5 years!



And Microsoft has moved from and to how many architectures? talk about grasping at straws by using a broken analogy on your part.



Because they're two different architectures; you can't compare a 7 year old machine of the same architecture to a machine of today of the same architecture. It's a stupid comparison.

Your arguments hold no water.

#1) Few people paid $129 for Leopard on PowerPC machines expecting it would be the end of the road.

#2) Supporting multiple architectures has been a part of Apple's history, Apple ][, Apple IIGS, Mac 68k, Mac PowerPC, now Mac Intel. There was an Apple ][e card for PowerPC machines, there was 68k support on PowerPC machines for a long time, now there is very quickly no PowerPC support to run the latest MacOS X.

#3) Less than 3 years for PowerPC, and just over a year for people who paid $129 for Leopard NOT KNOWING it was being discontinued for their machine immediately afterwards, NOT FIVE YEARS. Why do people keep bringing up NES and SGI and all these other completely ridiculous comparisons? It's not the same.

So you're basically wrong on all points and I can understand why INTEL people don't like these complaints, because many are SWITCHERS and don't know the history of Apple going back to the 1980s.

Many, including me, have replied to your rants but you ignore them and instead quote irrelevant posts to harp on about the same damn thing. We hear you; you're unhappy about Snow Leopard being Intel only. Thanks for your input.

You're just a spammer, destroying otherwise interesting discussion threads with the same crap posted in bold/centered/excessive !!!!!!!!!!'s. It astounds me that you haven't been banned yet.

I'm amazed that an INTEL Mac person wants me BANNED even though I've violated no site rules!
Just because I disagree with you? Amazing.

And I've pretty much disputed and proven wrong all of the arguments for abandoning PowerPC support, so what's your point again?

If a person who's owned an Apple computer since 1983 gets banned from this site just for disagreeing with the 66%-75% INTEL masses, than I don't want to be here anyway.
It's not like I'm the only disgruntled PowerPC person.

 

[macintoshtoffy]

I had repair my Time Machine disk last night. Not because of 10.5.8 specifically but it gets annoying when you spend 10 minutes preparing for a 21 MB backup because of "Node requires deep traversal".

I'd give that a look under Disk Utility.

I'd love them to finally get ZFS working; although it is a bit heavy on the memory usage (to improve performance) there is the benefit of having time machine at the file system level rather than something bolted on top.

I guess they're waiting till SSD become more common since ZFS is ideal for that sort of setup.

 

[CQd44]

do you care to enlighten us ...

Since he said his wireless wasn't working, he could perform "lspci" in terminal and look for the device ID and vendor ID of the wireless device in question.

Then he could navigate to (while in terminal) /System/Library/Extensions/IO80211Family.kext/Contents (it's something very similar to that)

Then, depending on what his wireless device is, he could "cd' to that folder and "nano" the Info.plist and scroll down and plug in his device ID. I know for mine I had to change a 1613 to a 1615 or something like that.

EDIT: I read a few posts back. Repairing permissions would be the first thing you should do!

 

[EgbertAttrick]

Mail Freezing Since Upgrade

Has anyone else had Mail suddenly stop responding since upgrading? Freezing, may be more like it. I don't get a pinwheel, Force Quit does not indicate that Mail is not responding, but I still can't use Mail. I can't click inside it, select mail... Nothing. I have to force quit to get it to work, again. This has happened twice since the update. Thanks in advance!

 

[macintoshtoffy]

Has anyone else had Mail suddenly stop responding since upgrading? Freezing, may be more like it. I don't get a pinwheel, Force Quit does not indicate that Mail is not responding, but I still can't use Mail. I can't click inside it, select mail... Nothing. I have to force quit to get it to work, again. This has happened twice since the update. Thanks in advance!

Do you use any third party plugins?

 

[AidenShaw]

Quote:
I mean I have a 7 year old PC that will run Windows 7 when it comes out

And Microsoft has moved from and to how many architectures? talk about grasping at straws by using a broken analogy on your part.

Hmmm...

• x86 16-bit - 16-bit DOS and Windows 3.x
• x86 32-bit - 32-bit Win9x, WinNT, Win2K, WinXP, Vista, Win7, Server (Win7 server drops x86 support)
• x64 64-bit - WinXP, Vista, Win7, Server
• IA64 - WinXP, Server
• PowerPC - WinNT up to 4.0
• Alpha - WinNT up to 4.0
• MIPS - WinNT up to 4.0
• SPARC - development, never released
• Clipper - development, never released
• i860 - development, never released

When Win7 ships this fall, supported systems will be

• x86 - Windows 7 (last release to support 32-bit x86)
• x64 - Windows 7, Windows Server 2008 R2 (Win7 Server)
• IA64 - Windows Server 2008 R2

Windows typically supports a system for as long as it is practical - basically until the system is so old that nobody cares anymore. For example, Windows 7 will run on a Pentium II, but since most of the common Pentium II chipsets had a maximum memory support of 384 MiB - it's not supported.

Amusing exercise: Windows 7 Successfully Installed on a Pentium II 266 MHz CPU, 96 MB of RAM and a 4 MB graphics card

__________

By the way, what was the point of bringing up how well Microsoft supports multiple architectures?

 

[bfc]

Personal attack and not a single Macrumors moderator to do a thing about it.



Then why didn't he mention it?

"I tried zyxn from poster foobah and it hasn't corrected the problem - has anyone got an alternate method that might work".

Its called communication; state your problem, state what you have done to your computer configuration (software or hardware), state the methods you have tried to rectify the problem and then state the conclusion - whether it worked or not. That is the method of asking questions.

Have some logical flow to your inquiry and you won't have a communication break down.



How about using communication instead of abusing people.

And your post could have been a simple as.... "Hey, there was a possible fix posted about a page back, did you try that?"

Instead, you insinuated that the poster; didn't read the thread and accused the poster of just wanting to complain.

 

[dernhelm]

None of these excuses or comments are valid reasons why Apple cannot compile a pretty similar version of Snow Leopard for POWERPC minus maybe 1 or 2 features. The idea that Snow Leopard could not possibly run on PowerPC Macs has been thoroughly debunked by tons of people smarter than me.
Some of SL's new features won't even run on many INTEL Macs!

Also, if history gives us any lessons, Apple most likely already HAS a POWERPC version of Snow Leopard. They had internal versions of MacOS X running for years on INTEL going back to Day 1 and nobody even had a clue about it!

Apple is just choosing not to test and release a PowerPC version and screwing over its longest most loyal customers, some of whom spent a small fortune on Apple equipment and won't be buying new computers in this bad economy as much as previously. I'm not replacing my G5s in this economy at this time. They are faster and more powerful than many INTEL Macs!

This idea that everyone is going to be tossing computers in the landfill every 3 years has got to end. Computers are slowly getting to point of being like cars and people will be increasingly keeping them longer because improvements are becoming so much tinier from year to year.

Apple should have stuck by its PowerPC customers who paid $129 for Leopard for one more version.

Making all these Snow Leopard BUG FIXES INTEL-ONLY is insulting to a large part of the Apple user base.

If Leopard is already so bloated, then Apple should fix it for BOTH INTEL and POWERPC!

We ALL paid the SAME $129!​

If 10.5.8 is the end of the road for Leopard, I think lots of Mac users are going to be pissed, not just me.

Wow. I can see you really feel cheated. How young is the PPC computer that you own? The last PPC based powerbook was released in Oct. 05. It'll be almost exactly 4 years old by the time SL is released. I don't know about the time table of the Mac Pro or Mini switchovers to Intel, but they must be pushing 4 years old as well.

Admittedly, you'll technically be 1 rev back on the OS come Oct (or Sept, or whenever SL is released) with no way to get "current" but you're also a very long way from not being supported. If history is any indication, Leopard will get to 10.5.12 or so before the updates cease, and OS support will likely continue until 2014 or later.

It is too bad that Apple felt the need to eliminate the PPC chip as a supported platform for SL - but I can't say I'm really suprised at all. Supporting multiple architectures is HARD. Really HARD. I've done it for simple applications for decades and whenever we were allowed to drop a platform we held a little party. I can't imagine what that party was like for the OS developers in Cupertino. Especially since they've been doing PPC, Intel and ARM for a few years now.

Like it or not, this is a move that simplifies things for the developers and reduces Apples costs in ways that most people just don't understand.

 

[macintoshtoffy]

Hmmm...

Hmm what?

Microsoft has made no architecture changes. Their consumer line has been on x86 since god was a teenager. Windows NT 4, primarily sold on x86, Windows 2000, sold only on x86. Windows XP, sold only on x86 in the mainstream OEM vendors. Windows Vista, sold only on x86. Windows 7, sold only on x86. Windows 95/98/98SE/ME were all x86 bound as well.

So tell me from NT 4 to Windows 7, Windows 95 to Windows ME, did they ever support more than one architecture in mainstream mass usage? when did they suddenly make a transition from PowerPC to x86? Infact, the closest I can think of it would be Windows NT on Alpha where they provided FX! which enabled x86 binaries to run on Windows NT for Alpha. You have provided no evidence of a whole sale move of their product from one architecture to another; where the industry made a decided shift from one architecture to another.

As for the Intel Pentium II - how the heck is that an example! it is still the same architecture as Core 2, Core, Pentium 4, Pentium III, Pentium 'Classic' - still the same ISA with some changes under the hood. Fundamentally they are still the same. They are still the same just as the move from G3 to G4 to G5 enables the same PowerPC Binaries to be run on each of the architectures.

Btw, don't try to enter into hair splitting regarding architectures; because I can imagine you're trying to claim that you're referring to operating architecture design when you well and truly know that it is the hardware. Don't also split hairs to make a claim that you were talking about the chip architecture versus the ISA.

 

[macintoshtoffy]

And your post could have been a simple as.... "Hey, there was a possible fix posted about a page back, did you try that?"

Instead, you insinuated that the poster; didn't read the thread and accused the poster of just wanting to complain.

Because is something like the 10th poster whining about the same crap that has been addressed already.

If a person can waste an hour of their life watching American Idol, I think they can easily spend a few minutes skimming through 18 pages of posts.

 

[HyperZboy]

I came late to the mac party - been a user for only 3 years and so was always on intel mac. I'm just wondering however - it seems to me that the number of PPC mac users at this point must be pretty small. If I had to guess, I'd guess maybe 10% of installed base. Anyone have a more specific number? just curious.

To me, I think ongoing support for an obsolete system is too much to ask past this point. Intel code should be optimized and resources martialed to that end, PPC is over, that's a simple fact.

The lowest PPC # I've seen posted anywhere was 17% and that was a suspicious source posted by an INTEL USER! LOL

So, unless someone comes up with better numbers than the ADIUM website/program, I think we can bet we're talking 25% - 33% of the current Mac user base.

My G5's are less obsolete & more powerful than half of the INTEL Mac Minis & were sold by Apple LESS THAN 3 YEARS AGO!

I could go on and on disproving these myths, just set 'em up and I'll knock 'em down.

But I have a life thank god.

However, I am thinking of starting an Anti-Apple POWERPC Support Blog.

I think there's a lot of disgruntled people out there who paid $129 and feel like they got cheated by Apple. It's a very difficult argument to prove Snow Leopard is nothing but a huge BUG FIX release that removes PowerPC code. Even the NAME is almost the SAME!

People are not fooled. They know 10.5.8 is NOT going to fix Leopard problems on PowerPC the way Snow Leopard is going to fix Leopard problems on INTEL Macs.

Apple has more money than probably any other computer company and they picked the wrong time to screw over the faithful.

 

[EgbertAttrick]

Do you use any third party plugins?

Thanks for the reply... I do use GrowlMail... Should I uninstall it?

 

[doug in albq]

LOL, someone should start a different thread that talks about the specifics of 10.5.8, because that aint going on here....

 

[macintoshtoffy]

Apple has more money than probably any other computer company and they picked the wrong time to screw over the faithful.

Could someone inform me at what moment Apple moved to become a organised religion? I remember at one stage Apple was a business whose primary reason for existence is to make money and return value to shareholders.

 

[HyperZboy]

Wow. I can see you really feel cheated. How young is the PPC computer that you own? The last PPC based powerbook was released in Oct. 05. It'll be almost exactly 4 years old by the time SL is released. I don't know about the time table of the Mac Pro or Mini switchovers to Intel, but they must be pushing 4 years old as well.

Admittedly, you'll technically be 1 rev back on the OS come Oct (or Sept, or whenever SL is released) with no way to get "current" but you're also a very long way from not being supported. If history is any indication, Leopard will get to 10.5.12 or so before the updates cease, and OS support will likely continue until 2014 or later.

It is too bad that Apple felt the need to eliminate the PPC chip as a supported platform for SL - but I can't say I'm really suprised at all. Supporting multiple architectures is HARD. Really HARD. I've done it for simple applications for decades and whenever we were allowed to drop a platform we held a little party. I can't imagine what that party was like for the OS developers in Cupertino. Especially since they've been doing PPC, Intel and ARM for a few years now.

Like it or not, this is a move that simplifies things for the developers and reduces Apples costs in ways that most people just don't understand.

I understand all of your points and they make sense except for the fact that Apple has traditionally supported products like Leopard for much longer than this and Apple users have always kept their machines longer then the industry average of 2-3 years, hence Apple's long term support of older machines.

My final point is simple. Apple is FILTHY RICH and the only computer company still making tons of money! They have the money to do Snow Leopard for PowerPC. It's chump change. They probably already have a running build and they'd make money off of selling it too!
Every OTHER company is troubled and unemployment is high.

How will this decision cause people with PowerPC Macs to upgrade to INTEL?
Since when do unemployed people run out and buy new computers first?

Guess what? It WON'T. Well, not unless there's a Cash for Computer Clunkers Program I don't know about! LOL
And its like a kick in the balls to the faithful who've stood by Apple through the rough years when there was talk of Apple going out of business.

And now what does filthy rich Apple give back?
They screw over people who paid $129 for Leopard just over a year ago.