Apple Seeds OS X Lion 10.7.4 Build 11E46

wikus

macrumors 68000
Jun 1, 2011
1,794
2
0
Planet earth.
Mission Control wasn't 'fixed' in 10.7.1 or 2 or 3, isn't 'fixed' in 10.7.4, and won't be 'fixed' in 10.8.

Seriously people...get over it.

...or stick with your beloved Snow Leopard.
Yeah man, lets just do everything one way because giving a couple options in system preferences is a bad thing. Mission Control and everything else should be static, and everyone should do as Apple tells them.

Options are bad. Very very bad.

:rolleyes:
 

Winni

macrumors 68040
Oct 15, 2008
3,112
922
0
Germany.
www.wmaus.net
I'll take a bad apple any day of the week over a 50 percent failure rate. Vista was the worst OS ever IMHO. They will end support before XP if that says something......
Apple already ended the support for Leopard, which is a much younger OS than Vista - "if that says something..."

And Microsoft only ended the "mainstream" support for Vista, which means that it will only receive security fixes from now on. Leopard will no longer receive ANYTHING from Apple. That's a big difference: Vista is on life support, Leopard is officially dead.

Also, Vista never really reached a two digit market share (but still had more users world wide than OS X). The Windows desktop market is basically divided between XP and 7, with 7 now finally having the larger market share. From a business perspective, Microsoft cannot be blamed for ending the mainstream support for Vista after the usual five years.

By the way - five years. Does that number ring a bell? Do you know ANY Apple platform that has been supported for that long? No. Because they don't. Apple's entire business model evolves around planned obsolescence.
 

Yamcha

macrumors 68000
Mar 6, 2008
1,799
134
0
I personally have not had any stability related issues with Mac OSX Lion whatsoever.. And I do love the User Interface changes over Snow Leopard, but thats just my opinion..

I think a common complaint is the choppiness of animations and effects on OSX Lion, but I can say without a doubt all my gripes with overall performance have been resolved with Mountain Lion..

I think It's a lot like the upgrade of Leopard to Snow Leopard.. Noticeably faster overall performance..
 

daneoni

macrumors G4
Mar 24, 2006
10,803
79
0
Yeah man, lets just do everything one way because giving a couple options in system preferences is a bad thing. Mission Control and everything else should be static, and everyone should do as Apple tells them.

Options are bad. Very very bad.

:rolleyes:
Oh pls, don't be melodramatic. Tons of feedback has already been submitted on the issue yet Apple isn't budging, which likely means this is how they want to proceed going forward. Which also means no matter how much you complain in threads nothing will change.

Four options then;

1. Keep submitting feedback to Apple and hoping
2. Stick to Snow Leopard
3. Swith to Windows
3. Get over it and adapt
 
Last edited:

itickings

macrumors 6502a
Apr 14, 2007
923
5
0
Oh pls, don't be melodramatic. Tons of feedback has already been submitted on the issue yet Apple isn't budging, which likely means this is how they want to proceed going forward. Which also means no matter how much you complain in threads nothing will change.
Tons of feedback perhaps, but it might also be the vocal minority after all...
Either that, or Apple simply does not give in to peer pressure. :p
 

G4DP

macrumors 65816
Mar 28, 2007
1,453
3
0
The people with wireless problems don't really know that they can fix it will some simple rules.

1. IMHO most store bought cheap wireless routers are designed to break down in two-three years. If you wireless router is older that that replace it immediately.

2. On Lion go to the System Preferences->Network pane. At the top of the Network pane is the 'Location' drop down. Use that Location drop down to select 'Edit Locations...'. Then another drop-down comes down and click the + button and then name your new custom named Location anything you want. The save this new Location and while still in the Network pane rejoin your wireless network. Lastly click on the 'Apply' button to save this new network setup. See if this helps your Lion wireless issues.

3. If you have AppleCare still use it ASAP!
Most of the wireless problems are nothing to do with the routers. It's poor design by Apple. Their laptops have been plagued by wireless connction issues for years.
 

Dragado

macrumors member
Mar 29, 2012
34
0
0
The fact that the issue is so widespread indicates it's a problem on Apple's end not with 3rd party software or configuration on end users machines. Just because you're not experiencing the issue it doesn't mean there's no issue.
It indicates nothing, and you have no proof of it being widespread. It could easily be some piece of popular software that I happen not to have.
 

mdgm

macrumors 6502a
Nov 2, 2010
912
26
0
It indicates nothing, and you have no proof of it being widespread. It could easily be some piece of popular software that I happen not to have.
I have seen several references to the issue online. You have no evidence to suggest it's not widespread.
 

cdmoore74

macrumors 68020
Jun 24, 2010
2,410
689
0
Wouldn't it be good to incorporate iOS usability and structure into OS X? Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't the smaller installation footprint and also apprize make the OS more stable and energy efficient as well? I personally like where Apple is going by utilizing iOS ideas and functionality into OS X.
I agree. :D
 

jlnr

macrumors regular
Sep 27, 2010
136
6
0
By the way - five years. Does that number ring a bell? Do you know ANY Apple platform that has been supported for that long? No. Because they don't. Apple's entire business model evolves around planned obsolescence.
I wish Greenpeace or anyone else would slam Apple for the planned obsolescence crap. At least you can use Apple computers securely for around 5 years _if_ you continue to buy OS upgrades, until they arbitrarily cut you off. It's hard to find a professional use for them after that.
My 2006 Mac Mini will probably get security updates until 10.8 is out, that makes it exactly 6 years of secure operation. No comparison to the longevity of early XP desktops, though, which might happily live twice as long.
 
Last edited:

Dragado

macrumors member
Mar 29, 2012
34
0
0
I have seen several references to the issue online. You have no evidence to suggest it's not widespread.
I'm not saying it isn't widespread, I'm just saying that you can't claim it's widespread if there is no real data behind that claim. People like you create problems with imaginary data, and I don't like it. I think this argument is finished, thanks for playing.

EDIT: Also, just so you know, people tend to complain about issues online when they have issues... I could point to many posts on a variety of rare issues and make the same claim that you made about the issues being widespread; I would of course be wrong.
 

MrAndy1369

Guest
Nov 27, 2011
37
0
0
Interesting viewpoints. Here's mine: I'm actually new to Macs (got my MBP in late 2011), and so far, I love Lion. I have been using OSX since 2004 or so, in a school setting, and I must say that Lion is probably one of the best releases out there so far. Yes, there are some noticeable bugs - I do become tired of the long WiFi "search" after waking up after sleep, some graphic stuttering, etc., but overall Lion has treated me pretty well. I downgraded to Snow Leopard earlier this year, and didn't notice much of a difference - SL may have been a bit smoother in terms of graphics, but otherwise, no difference. I ended up going back to Lion.

I think Lion is a "first-generation" OS, and ML should refine much of the experience even more. That said, I think Apple should do the following:

-Implement iCloud for Snow Leopard. I know it's a 2009 OS, but Apple has iCloud support available for Vista, an OS from 2006. Like another user upthread mentioned, there's also the issue of PowerPC program support - giving users an ultimaum. I really think Apple should back down and support iCloud on SL, for the sake of many users' complaints.
-NOT force iOS upon us. OSX is much better for multitasking. I get that iPhones, iPads, etc. are generating most of Apple's revenue those days, but I definitely don't want my OSX experience to become iOS-like, with a 'home screen' taking over the desktop. I'm confident it won't happen - Apple isn't that stupid. Yes, implement iOS features to OSX all you want, but don't change the OSX experience to be limited like iOS.

It's also possible the reason Apple is releasing Mountain Lion so quickly is because of the bad press and reputation surrounding Lion - and with ML, Apple may move back to a 2-year release cycle...unless it was explicitly stated by Apple that they were moving to a yearly OSX release cycle?
 

KPOM

macrumors G5
Oct 23, 2010
14,330
2,957
0
Lets hope so. Lets also hope they don't have the audacity to charge those who purchased Lion to upgrade.
I paid for this OS I shouldn't have to pay for bug fixes. The added features should be a way of making it up to those who have had to deal with Apples incompetence.
I think it will be a $29 update. Remember, Microsoft charged the full price for Windows 7 to everyone, including those who put up with Vista. Apple seems to like the $29 annual update model. Bug fixes for Lion will come in the way of point updates. 10.7.4 is one such example.

----------

I wish Greenpeace or anyone else would slam Apple for the planned obsolescence crap. At least you can use Apple computers securely for around 5 years _if_ you continue to buy OS upgrades, until they arbitrarily cut you off. It's hard to find a professional use for them after that.
My 2006 Mac Mini will probably get security updates until 10.8 is out, that makes it exactly 6 years of secure operation. No comparison to the longevity of early XP desktops, though, which might happily live twice as long.
I think the longevity of XP was unintended. Remember, Vista was delayed for almost 2 years, and it wasn't well received.

During the PowerPC and Motorola 68K era, generally Macs had better longevity than DOS/Windows PCs. That changed a bit during the Intel era, and accelerated in the last few years of Steve Jobs, particularly as Apple's fortunes became increasingly tied to iOS, which in general is built upon a 2-year upgrade cycle (since phone contracts are 2 years long). Intel's switch to an accelerated timetable for new processor releases also has had an impact.

That said, there are practical reasons for the dropping of compatibility with older Macs. With 10.6, Apple cut the cord with PowerPC. 10.7 became primarily 64-bit, and so it was natural to drop support for 32-bit Intel Macs (unfortunately, the Core 2 Duo came out a few months after Apple made the switch and so the early Intel Macs had the older 32-bit Core processor based on the older Pentium M). 10.8's cutoff is slightly more arbitrary, but it appears to be tied to graphics capabilities. It's important to point out that the Intel shift, from a technological perspective, was a slight step backward at first. PowerPC had gone 64-bit sooner. The switch to Intel was driven by availability and power consumption.
 

makitango

macrumors regular
Apr 15, 2012
136
111
0
I think the longevity of XP was unintended. Remember, Vista was delayed for almost 2 years, and it wasn't well received.

During the PowerPC and Motorola 68K era, generally Macs had better longevity than DOS/Windows PCs. That changed a bit during the Intel era, and accelerated in the last few years of Steve Jobs, particularly as Apple's fortunes became increasingly tied to iOS, which in general is built upon a 2-year upgrade cycle (since phone contracts are 2 years long). Intel's switch to an accelerated timetable for new processor releases also has had an impact.

That said, there are practical reasons for the dropping of compatibility with older Macs. With 10.6, Apple cut the cord with PowerPC. 10.7 became primarily 64-bit, and so it was natural to drop support for 32-bit Intel Macs (unfortunately, the Core 2 Duo came out a few months after Apple made the switch and so the early Intel Macs had the older 32-bit Core processor based on the older Pentium M). 10.8's cutoff is slightly more arbitrary, but it appears to be tied to graphics capabilities. It's important to point out that the Intel shift, from a technological perspective, was a slight step backward at first. PowerPC had gone 64-bit sooner. The switch to Intel was driven by availability and power consumption.
Very fair and good points, but Windows XP can, in many points, very well be seen as Apple's OS X SL. It has had a great overall stability and was not bloated at all (performance yay!). Like Windows XP, it had few compatibility issues and bugs at the initial release but it grew to a great overall performing OS with updates. Plus, they have (still) the greatest way of handling both 32bit (+Rosetta) and 64bit software.

That being said, it disappoints me how Apple treats this very fine piece of software (and their customers all the way down with it), which really isn't that old. Plus, Apple has a way of ignoring security updates for users not using their shiny latest software build, which is, in my opinion, a bad move. Even though I am not using SL or iOS lower than 5.x (even though I'd like to, 5.x feels very bloated).
M$ at least manages to stand by their product's flaws and fix them and to respect their customers which are not always joining their newest line of products - and I hope Apple would be just a little bit more open-minded to respect their customers in a similar way instead of sticking with the it-never-raids-in-cupertino-stance. Especially since they do not respect their own philosophy of thinking different anymore. One may be able to adapt to the way Apple Macs work right now (have the latest software and products and use it as we tell you to do) or find himself with very annoying and nasty issues. Luckily I found solutions for me but I'd be more happy to have a little bit more freedom for everyone.
 

jlnr

macrumors regular
Sep 27, 2010
136
6
0
I think the longevity of XP was unintended. Remember, Vista was delayed for almost 2 years, and it wasn't well received.
No doubt they planned to stop selling XP way earlier, but they extended even that when netbooks came out and couldn't handle Vista. Can you imagine Apple being this liberal? And all business versions of Windows come with the promise of 10 years of security fixes, though I think Windows 2000 was slightly shorter. Buying a desktop Mac doesn't feel like a great investment under this upgrade pressure from Apple, especially when some come with the display built in.

One observation about how Apple does not have a policy for security support at all: http://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/47664/what-is-apples-policy-for-supporting-security-updates-on-older-versions-of-os-x
And one with more pessimism about 10.6 updates beyond 2012: http://www.sture.ch/node/196 (only Google Cache works for me)
 
Last edited:

tigress666

macrumors 68040
Apr 14, 2010
3,286
15
0
Washington State
Osx lion, the worst, most buggy os that never should have existed
Nope, you've obviously never used Mac OS 8.0 ;). Trust me, that one *SUCKED* and made your computer super slow and laggy. 8.5 fixed it and made it seem like a total new OS, not just a bug fix. 8.6 added some nice features if I remember right.

Lion, at least for me, hasn't really seriously slowed my computer down. And if I'm encountering bugs, it's in Firefox which could just be Firefox.
 

WeegieMac

Guest
Jan 29, 2008
3,273
1
0
Glasgow, UK
I'm using Mountain Lion DP2 as my main OS, and it's far better on my iMac than Lion was, especially in UI animations which are hellish on my iMac using Lion.

Going to/from fullscreen mode and launching Launchpad was a stuttering experience, and opening Folders was really poor in terms of animations.

Mountain Lion is vastly superior in that regard on my system.
 

Stevamundo

macrumors 6502
May 18, 2008
282
0
0
Why the heck are they releasing 10.8 so soon after 10.7? Isn't it better to let 10.7 mature a bit, get all the bugs out, and have a nice stable user experience before they dive into the next release?

This sort of rapid release is just going to result in a buggier OS overall, since it'll spend less time in "maintenance" mode... which is when you find most of the subtle bugs.
That was exactly what I thought when I read that Apple is probably going to have a new version of OS X every year for now on. We DON'T need that! What we DO need however, is for Apple to make sure their CURRENT OS X version is bug-free and rock solid as it possibly can get, AND THEN work on the next version of OS X.

New versions OS X every year sounds VERY RISKY to me. I just don't like that concept, not at all.
 

OtherJesus

macrumors 6502
Sep 28, 2005
375
129
0
Bay Area, California
www.myspace.com
Ah, that must mean that Lion is perfect, and everyone else is just "doing it wrong." :rolleyes:
No, it doesn't mean that but it could point to the very real possibility that some other programs, drivers, etc. that are causing certain issues for you. I have lion on a brand new iMac and upgraded from SL on a 3 yr old MacBook and the only issue I've ever come across is LaunchPad changing how I've arranged my apps.

Technology will never be perfect.
Just like humans.

Trolls be gone!!
 

thekeyring

macrumors 68040
Jan 5, 2012
3,443
2,054
0
London
Hopefully this will fix a few problems with my girlfriend's MacBook Pro. After upgrading to Lion Microsoft Office stopped working, and the Sims 3 has developed a glitch.
 

mrbyu

macrumors 6502
Jul 5, 2011
323
61
0
For me, Lion offers a lot of welcome features, that I would miss from SL, if I had to use that. Most of them are part of the new multitouch interface. I'm simply loving this intuitive way of swiping between web pages, desktops, full screen apps, etc. I couldn't live without them by now, but I can see that these are not so important for desktop users, who cannot benefit from these whole multi-touch thing (unless they use a magic trackpad).

The bugs that I've experienced with Lion so far (MacBook Air 2011, 13"):
- sometimes, very rarely, maybe once a week, but some apps freeze (just like in Windows or Linux, I have to force-quit)
- it stills annoys me a little, that in Safari at the home page I usually have to move over the mouse a little, until the desired page gets in focus
- the full screen apps, especially Safari sometimes become messed up (some bar or button disappears, and I have to close and open the full screen view again, to fix it)
- sometimes copying photos from iPhoto to a folder doesn't work

These are the ones that I can remember so far. No one of them makes me mad actually, they occur very rare, and they never mess up my work. I almost never use Launchpad, but I regularly use Mission Control. Animations and everything works fluently by me, and I've never seen my Mac lag even for a sec (maybe that's because the new Airs with SSD are blazing fast anyway, I don't know...).

I can imagine that for a lot of people Lion is a nightmare, but to be fair, my point of view needs to be written here as well. Of course there are some little things, missing functions that I would like see to change in future releases, but these have nothing to do with bugs. And I'm actually looking forward to the even more "iOS-like" form of ML.
 

thekeyring

macrumors 68040
Jan 5, 2012
3,443
2,054
0
London
That was exactly what I thought when I read that Apple is probably going to have a new version of OS X every year for now on. We DON'T need that! What we DO need however, is for Apple to make sure their CURRENT OS X version is bug-free and rock solid as it possibly can get, AND THEN work on the next version of OS X.

New versions OS X every year sounds VERY RISKY to me. I just don't like that concept, not at all.
It could be that as Mountain Lion is to Lion what Snow Leopard was to Leopard, that the OS will be bug-free (or as bug-free as is possible), fast and saves on disk space, as well as adding a few new features.