Could Snow Leopard Be Apples Vista?

[pratap21]

There are something like 30 models that run the new OS and hundreds, no, thousands of applications, browser extensions, etc!

It is impossible that they will have tested all of it, if they did, it would never come out!

Besides, if you want to see a scary OS launch look at how MS does it. Releasing beta software at high prices to hapless customers who get to be the beta testers.

How is it 30 different models? Consider that SL supports only Intel macs.

Moreover the applications, browser extensions, etc should not come into picture because people are having issues with the OS (expose laggy) on a FRESH install.

Even I expect Apple to release a really stable OS from day 1 since they control both HW and SW. Microsoft's task of getting their OS to work on ANY computer (thousands of potential configurations) is much much more difficult.

 

[xIGmanIx]

There are something like 30 models that run the new OS and hundreds, no, thousands of applications, browser extensions, etc!

It is impossible that they will have tested all of it, if they did, it would never come out!

Besides, if you want to see a scary OS launch look at how MS does it. Releasing beta software at high prices to hapless customers who get to be the beta testers.

how does apple shortcomings have anything to do with microsoft? Just imagine if you have all the software that is available on a mac, how much larger the microsoft level of support is, my guess is significantly greater than apples. just leave it alone, both have had troubles at launch, period

 

[glossywhite]

Actually, i always kinda expect apple to have their OS stable at launch, but i always expect to be let down. They only have a few computers to support, they should be able to have a fairly solid OS on Day 0.

You expect the impossible. Why don't you apply for a job as Cocoa dev @ Apple, and then you can show them all where they're slipping up?. You show an evident lack of knowledge about this whole situation, and I am not spending my evening churning out paragraphs which explain it all to you. The OS is usable and fluid for MOST users, but how on earth can Apple possibly expect to cover ALL firmware versions of hardware, ALL installed devices, ALL possible combinations of software and their differing versions, corrupted files, user ignorance regarding things like permission repair etc - the list goes on and on, there are just SO many variables that it is plain impossible to cover EVERY conceivable combination of circumstances under which you would install Snow Leopard, and expect them ALL to work!.

I'm not trying to be rude here, but you really appear as if you haven't a clue, and I would be surprised if you proved me wrong, but I hope you will.

 

[jmpage2]

How is it 30 different models? Consider that SL supports only Intel macs.

Moreover the applications, browser extensions, etc should not come into picture because people are having issues with the OS (expose laggy) on a FRESH install.

Even I expect Apple to release a really stable OS from day 1 since they control both HW and SW. Microsoft's task of getting their OS to work on ANY computer (thousands of potential configurations) is much much more difficult.

Expose is not laggy on all the hardware. Seeing as there are currently three macbook pro models, a macbook model, four imac models, multiple mac pro models, just for the current model lineup, yes there are well over 30 supported configurations of Intel machines for Snow Leopard.

I also haven't seen it corroborated in one single review of Snow Leopard that it is unstable or buggy on a fresh install on newer supported hardware. I suppose we should just assume all these problems exist because of a few users here.

 

[NoSmokingBandit]

There are something like 30 models that run the new OS and hundreds, no, thousands of applications, browser extensions, etc!

It is impossible that they will have tested all of it, if they did, it would never come out!

Besides, if you want to see a scary OS launch look at how MS does it. Releasing beta software at high prices to hapless customers who get to be the beta testers.

Oddly enough i have always found great app compatibility with windows upgrades. Going from Tiger to Leo broke almost all of my apps, but going to Vista from XP only broke a few (2 i think).

 

[glossywhite]

Oddly enough i have always found great app compatibility with windows upgrades. Going from Tiger to Leo broke almost all of my apps, but going to Vista from XP only broke a few (2 i think).

I think I have found the solution for you; don't use Macs - YOU are the incompatibility here... "PEBKAC"!. 🙄

 

[pratap21]

I think I have found the solution for you; don't use Macs - YOU are the incompatibility here... "PEBKAC"!. 🙄

The problem is Apple fanbois like you who refuse to accept at any cost that Microsoft does a much better job than Apple at CERTAIN things (backward compatibility, support on diverse hardware, etc).

I can't believe the upgrade from L->SL breaks Mac apps but upgrade from XP->Vista preserved most of the Windows apps (consider that win has 100x more apps)

 

[jmpage2]

The problem is Apple fanbois like you who refuse to accept at any cost that Microsoft does a much better job than Apple at CERTAIN things (backward compatibility, support on diverse hardware, etc).

I can't believe the upgrade from L->SL breaks Mac apps but upgrade from XP->Vista preserved most of the Windows apps (consider that win has 100x more apps)

That's not true at all. There were plenty of applications that did not work in Vista unless you specifically went in and set them up in "XP compatibility mode" and even then there were issues with them.

The bottom line is that major OS overhauls almost always break some applications.

 

[alleycat]

Here's how to install Snow Leopard and Vista side by side! 😀

 

[glossywhite]

The problem is Apple fanbois like you who refuse to accept at any cost that Microsoft does a much better job than Apple at CERTAIN things (backward compatibility, support on diverse hardware, etc).

I can't believe the upgrade from L->SL breaks Mac apps but upgrade from XP->Vista preserved most of the Windows apps (consider that win has 100x more apps)

Hardly "breaks" them, now does it!. If software companies STILL haven't made SL versions of their software, then who is to blame?. If the OS moves forward, but the software vendors don't, then blame Apple?... okkkkk
🙄

Here's how to install Snow Leopard and Vista side by side! 😀

I'm sure you were trying to be funny & artistic, but it failed - sorry.

 

[macintoshtoffy]

Exclude third party software and hardware, and idiots who don't do a clean install (format the drive from top to bottom) - then we can chat. I've yet to meet a person who isn't experiencing a problem because of a lazy third party or a lack of a clean install (or both).

Windows Vista problem wasn't just the issue of third party drivers; there was a general crappiness of the over all operating system when you take those variables out of the equation.

 

[Flyby1023]

Nice shot alleycat ... equal time.

Back to the stated topic - "Apples Vista", there are several criteria to make this comparison, here's just one.

In order for Apple to have significant growth, outside of the phone market, they have to go for the corporate wallet. This is why they put in Exchange in their contact apps. Exchange was the reason I went to SL so quickly. How many 5-seat graphics shops have Exchange and BES servers?

When I have to upgrade a component in the company it’s not a glossy white notebook every two years, it’s skid loads of equipment. The main concern people like me have with IT issues is disruption – any disruption. This is why Vista had such a problem, we sat on our hands and let the early adopters have at it, they voted and we stayed with XP.

Because I love the Mac platform, and tech toys in general, and my upgrade to Leopard was seamless, and because Apple is moving toward the corporate world, I wanted to put it through it’s paces at home before considering any serious business implementation. Frankly, I don’t know any company that’s not in the software or hardware business that would upgrade anything that required a clean install on a few hundred seats.

Pretty soon this whole Mac – PC thing is going to be moot anyway. As companies move to distributed apps and more vendors move to SAS, the box on your desk is going to be nothing more than an appliance, just like your cable box. Think Google really cares whose platform you are on?

 

[sommls]

Exclude third party software and hardware, and idiots who don't do a clean install (format the drive from top to bottom) - then we can chat. I've yet to meet a person who isn't experiencing a problem because of a lazy third party or a lack of a clean install (or both).

Windows Vista problem wasn't just the issue of third party drivers; there was a general crappiness of the over all operating system when you take those variables out of the equation.

This comment makes a lot of sense: just zero out the drive and be done with it, you'll be living with the result for quite a while.

It's fair to say that limiting backward compatibility is a conscious choice by Apple, though. This OS is clearly pointed at weeding out legacy hardware and, to some degree, software.

Also, there are a number of very common applications (e.g., Growl) that have not yet been updated despite the fact that all parties have known this was coming but arrived a few weeks early. Responsibility on both sides...

These minor complaints, though, miss the main point. 10.6 is by itself quite stable enough for a first effort and doesn't willy-nilly break major apps or non-archaic hardware the way Vista did. This is so far from that debacle as to be unworthy of comparison.

 

[mortfe]

Apple pushed this out instead of a full OS because they are too busy and making too much money with the iPhone. I have disk but with all the incompatabilities, I am afraid to install. Lepard runs great, no problems.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

Exclude third party software and hardware, and idiots who don't do a clean install (format the drive from top to bottom) - then we can chat. I've yet to meet a person who isn't experiencing a problem because of a lazy third party or a lack of a clean install (or both).

Speaking as an "idiot" that didn't do a clean install any of his three Mac, I haven't had any OS related issues. I think the "idiots" are those that think everyone needs to do a clean install when the reality is if you properly prepare a newer Mac (delete caches & update 3rd party s/w before upgrading etc) a regular install is just fine.

A lack of a clean install doesn't cause problems... sticking in the install DVD w/o prepping a computer first causes problems. A clean install is just a meat cleaver approach to prepping because it just wipes the disk.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

Apple pushed this out instead of a full OS because they are too busy and making too much money with the iPhone. I have disk but with all the incompatabilities, I am afraid to install. Lepard runs great, no problems.

I assure you 10.5.0 had PLENTY of incompatibilities too. It's the nature of any .0 OS. When 10.7 ships I guarantee people will be saying SL runs great so they are afraid to install 10.7. Anyone who thinks 10.6 isn't a full OS hasn't really done their research.

You can start with John Siracusa's in-depth review (and I do mean in-depth) ---> http://arstechnica.com/apple/reviews/2009/08/mac-os-x-10-6.ars

 

[definitive]

I'm sure you were trying to be funny & artistic, but it failed - sorry.

brb, drinking my latte and typing my latest novel on a macbook air at the starbucks while being artistic.

 

[scaredpoet]

Apple pushed this out instead of a full OS because they are too busy and making too much money with the iPhone. I have disk but with all the incompatabilities, I am afraid to install. Lepard runs great, no problems.

Not even CLOSE to being true. SL is a full OS, and well worth the upgrade.

Anyway, as someone who went through both the XP -> Vista 64-bit upgrade and now the Leopard -> Snow Leopard upgrade, I can say that no, SL is nowhere close to being Apple's Vista.

Have there been incompatibilities? Sure! I had problems with

- iStat menus (fixed)
- Flip4Mac (fixed so far with a beta release of the new version)
- Growl (not yet fixed but still useable, though I hear betas fix the problems)
- and iCal (publishing calendars to the Web doesn't work for all-day events; workaround for now is to run the app in 32-bit mode on the Mac that does the publishing)

Considering most of these issues are mitigated for me with workarounds, I'm pretty happy with SL right now.

Vista? Heh! When I upgraded, nothing worked, and there were no workarounds. My computer was pretty much unuseable for over a month before fixes finally started to trickle in, and it was enough to make me switch to a Mac. Is Snow leopard bad enough for me to switch back? Not in a million years.

The press pretty much bears it out too. Reviews are mostly positive for SL. Whereas Vista got near-universal bad press all around.

Microsoft likes to take zings at Apple for charging $29 for what they claim is equivalent to a "Service Pack" upgrade. But, why are they charging anywhere from $119 to $329 for the release of Windows that supposedly cleans up their last big mistake?

I guess bigger mistakes lead to bigger upgrade costs, huh?

 

[scaredpoet]

My default printer is a < 1yr old Canon MX700 (networked), bought it from Apple, fully supported under SL, 10.6 drivers, etc. It flat-out disappeared from SL, worked fine with Fusion/XP. A new Brother laser I forgot I had showed up just fine, except I couldn't print to it. I know I wasn't alone with this problem.
[..]
Bottom line bitch is my issues were all-Apple.

Your network issues are all Apple, but I can assure you that the printer issues are ALL Canon. Canon hasn't bothered to upgrade most of their drivers into the Intel arena, and I learned the hard way how bad they are when I upgraded to Leopard from Tiger and lost support for my printer and a few models of scanners I used at home and at work. They simply are horrible at updating their drivers. For photo printers and scanners, I've switched to HP and EPSON and haven't looked back. Both of them have been supported by SL right out of the box.

I still have a Canon EOS camera, because those simply can't be beat, and you don't need to wait for Canon to update their drivers for SLR cameras as long as you're transferring your photos via a card reader. But I will never use their printer or scanner products again.

 

[jmpage2]

Nice shot alleycat ... equal time.

Back to the stated topic - "Apples Vista", there are several criteria to make this comparison, here's just one.

In order for Apple to have significant growth, outside of the phone market, they have to go for the corporate wallet. This is why they put in Exchange in their contact apps. Exchange was the reason I went to SL so quickly. How many 5-seat graphics shops have Exchange and BES servers?

When I have to upgrade a component in the company it’s not a glossy white notebook every two years, it’s skid loads of equipment. The main concern people like me have with IT issues is disruption – any disruption. This is why Vista had such a problem, we sat on our hands and let the early adopters have at it, they voted and we stayed with XP.

Because I love the Mac platform, and tech toys in general, and my upgrade to Leopard was seamless, and because Apple is moving toward the corporate world, I wanted to put it through it’s paces at home before considering any serious business implementation. Frankly, I don’t know any company that’s not in the software or hardware business that would upgrade anything that required a clean install on a few hundred seats.

Pretty soon this whole Mac – PC thing is going to be moot anyway. As companies move to distributed apps and more vendors move to SAS, the box on your desk is going to be nothing more than an appliance, just like your cable box. Think Google really cares whose platform you are on?

The Exchange support in Snow Leopard is a 'dot zero' feature, in that they have never had it before. It's only been tested with Exchange Server 2007 with a specific service pack. It is inevitable that there are going to be issues with it. Issues that Apple will hopefully sort through, assuming that MS does not do some under handed things to try to lock them out of Exchange access.

The point with this though is that Apple Snow Leopard has Exchange support built in as part of the $29 OS upgrade, where as the $300 corporate edition of Windows 7 doesn't.

Which OS is a service pack again?

 

[Freyqq]

So the question goes could Snow Leopard become Apples version of VISTA?

Before you scream hell no, let me ask you a few things and see if you agree.

Everything I heard about Leopard was it was it's the best most stable OS ever made, and judging from alot of people this is apples Best OS.

Enter Snow Leopard- Lots of "under the hood" improvements 64bit faster, leaner but could this cause consumers a bunch of headaches?

Lots of compatibility issues, Buggy OS since its re-written lots of crashes and weirdness?

I understand they are trying to move from 32 bit to 64 and using this new quasi 32/64 kernal and os but if consumers hears it's buggy, its slower (which some major sites are reporting in terms of graphics etc) is Apple leaving the door open for ridicule (commericals) bashing Snow Leopard?

Im a windows and new OS X user so I like both, but if Snow Leopard requires a bunch of patches and fixes to get it stable and fast than what makes it any better than Vista was?

For the record Im a Technet user as well and have been using the new Windows 7 x64 and it is rock solid, fast and stable. (minus the viruses 🙂 )

Dont get me wrong im not bashing Apple I just got a system for Snow Leopard Im just asking if anyone here would be willing to criticize apple if the new OS is a mess?

10.5 was equally as screwed up when it was first released. Wifi was broken and my mac wouldn't sleep half the time. It seems to take them a few patches to get it right. It's silly to be an early adopter, when you can just wait a couple months for them to fix it. Not many reasons to switch yet either anyway b\c no substantial new features to speak of.

 

[Flyby1023]

The Exchange support in Snow Leopard is a 'dot zero' feature, in that they have never had it before. It's only been tested with Exchange Server 2007 with a specific service pack. It is inevitable that there are going to be issues with it. Issues that Apple will hopefully sort through, assuming that MS does not do some under handed things to try to lock them out of Exchange access.

Actually the Exchange part of it worked very well. It seems to have a little issue deciding on the right outgoing SMTP server, but that's fairly minor. One I gave it the usual secret-decoder-ring info it found the account right away. It hung digesting the server folders (there was a bunch), but a restart fixed that.

Overall the Exchange connection worked well on email, calendar and contacts, no complaints. The Apple apps here don't have the horsepower that Outlook has for power users. But being able to jump in quick when I am on the Mac side of this machine is nice. It also means I don't have to start Fusion/XP so much when I am on the Air, that's helpful too.

They obviously did their homework on Exchange . . . talk about integration with third-party apps. Maybe they reassigned the printer driver resources to Exchange. I could get my email OK, just couldn't print it from the Mac side.

 

[jmpage2]

Most printer issues are quite fixable, which model printer is it and how is it connected?

 

[glossywhite]

This thread is pointless...

 

[Neotyguy40]

Here's the thing about Windows:

1. Microsoft updates their OS using 'Service Packs'
2. These Service Packs include bug fixes, security flaws fixes, and some other minor things.
3. When these Service Packs get released, they are only released once every 6-24 months.

Now here is the thing about OS X:

1. Apple updates their OS using 'Updates' (not very original, but they are simple!)
2. These Updates include bug fixes, speed boosts, and some other minor things.
3. When these Updates get released, they are released once every 2-10 weeks.

See the difference? Vista had many MANY glitches from the start, while 10.6 only has a few. Vista had to wait months for M$ to fix them, while 10.6 will get the first group of bug-fixes in the next 1-10 days.

Now I see your point, Vista had most of it's bugs fixed by now, but everyone still thinks of it as horrible based on the first few reviews. The good news is that Apple will fix many of the bugs before people start looking at it poorly.