is SL as bad as everyone is saying?

Discussion in 'macOS' started by otis123, Sep 1, 2009.

  1. otis123 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 4, 2006
    #1
    I know 10.X.0 releases are buggy, I upgraded a ibook to leopard the day it came out. but I did a clean install of SL yesterday and I am very pleased, WiFi issues are fixed, wake up and sleep are faster, so is restart/boot and all that jazz, and i regained 9gb of hard drive space. yes it is true SL is a big service pack, but that is what apple said it was all along, and give any bugs your having some time I bet 10.6.1 will fix a lot of issues.
     
  2. Watabou macrumors 68040

    Watabou

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Location:
    United States
    #3
    Snow Leopard is working just fine for me and even better than Leopard. I'm having no issues.

    And this is a forum. People tend to state their annoyances with SL more than their happiness.
     
  3. sidewinder macrumors 68020

    sidewinder

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Northern California
    #4
    Most people are not having problems. You just read about them here because those are the people speak up. I did a standard upgrade install and have had zero issues.

    S-
     
  4. thegoldenmackid macrumors 604

    thegoldenmackid

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2006
    Location:
    dallas, texas
    #5
    There are a couple of small problems, but in general most users seem happy with it; considering that it is barely five days old.

    Seriously though, we are just going to reiterate exactly what has been said in one of the bijillion threads about people's thoughts on it.

    Here is one uplifting thread.
     
  5. zbasarab macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2009
    #6
    the only negative ive gotten from my upgrade was a slight speed decrease in safari and occasional safari crash. im sure 10.6.1 should fix it.

    other than that ive had no problems. and i did a plain old upgrade, not a clean install
     
  6. xraydoc macrumors demi-god

    xraydoc

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2005
    Location:
    192.168.1.1
    #7
    On my Mac Pro, I installed on a new (and faster) hard drive then migrated all my stuff over from the old drive using Migration Assistant. So far, works perfectly. I haven't had a chance yet to test everything (it's been less than 24 hours) but so far I haven't had any issues. Even the Logitech control panel/drivers for my mouse and keyboard seem to be working - and that's no small feet knowing the state of Logitech's software.

    I haven't had a chance to install it on my unibody MacBook yet, but may do that tonight. I presume it should have an even lower chance of trouble since I use virtually no third party hardware or system extensions on it.
     
  7. jordan eff macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2008
    #8
    i am more than happy with SL, other than expose been a little choppy the odd time i have no problems and enjoy the performance increase
     
  8. sputacus macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2009
    Location:
    Duncanville TX
  9. TEG macrumors 604

    TEG

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2002
    Location:
    Langley, Washington
    #10
    SL is working great. The people who are complaining are trying to use software that is not supported. I lost my Menu Meters (similar to iStat) because the file that is called to get the information went from storing everything in 32-bits to storing in 64-bits. They are expecting an update soon. Everything else seems to work just fine.

    TEG
     
  10. otis123 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 4, 2006
    #11
    I do miss my istat menus! my menu bar seems so empty...
     
  11. thepro8 macrumors member

    thepro8

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2009
    #12
    Working great for me. Much faster using the 64 bit kernel.
     
  12. simonshek macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2009
    #13
    bad?! It is great at least better than I thought. Mac run faster.
     
  13. jimboutilier macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2008
    Location:
    Denver
    #14
    Disappointing

    I don't think SL is bad. Its certainly far better than Leopard 10.5.0. But its not better than 10.5.8

    So I'm disappointed because I was expecting a tweaked version of Leopard that was better, faster, stronger. In my case its not better (less reliable), not faster (slower according to xbench) and not smaller (disk space savings were illusionary).

    So what I got was an OS with major changes under the hood to lay a future foundation with none of the immediate benefits I wanted and all I have to show for it is some surface fluff. Ok, I admit there was a bunch of features I stopped using when Leopard came out cause they were buggier than crap - and SL may fix a lot of them so in coming months I may learn to appreciate it as I try some of these features again (like Spaces).
     
  14. InvalidUserID macrumors 6502a

    InvalidUserID

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2008
    Location:
    Palo Alto, CA
    #15
    I'm indifferent about it. It hasn't had any noticeable difference on my machine.
     
  15. snakesqzns macrumors regular

    snakesqzns

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2007
    #16
    With Leopard I could run world of warcraft maximized fullscreen on a second display (1920x1080) and still use safari, itunes, and ichat on the main display without a noticeable UI lag.

    With SL there's a definite delay using the GUI, safari pages scroll much slower, and WoW FPS drops about 10% with safari running.

    I've got a 4gb MBP with an 8600M GT
     
  16. greatmaju macrumors member

    greatmaju

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2008
    Location:
    A Little place i Call Terra
    #17
    I installed it over Leopard (ergo no the clean install)
    And... No problems (Macbook early 2008). Well, I was expecting an increase in speed for third party apps, though Flock seems slow as hell, but Finder is faster. Preview is a lot faster. Safari is the fastest browser I've used, despite the lack of plug-ins. (Really miss the AdBlock Plus and Personal Web Cleaner)
    And quicklook doesn't support a plug-in for List view (Useful for looking into folders)
    Start up is not as fast as I thought it would be, but shutdown is faster.

    Expose is better though it is a bit buggy, with several windows open, and the bigger icons with the new PDF and everything in Finder. the 64-bit inside makes a difference. Pity that almost none other third party Apps are 64 bit (I'm looking at you, photoshop!)

    Hell, I remember setting up a Vista machine last year, and it didn't go as good as this. my own user profile got corrupted, and it crashes if 2 specific user profiles are logged on at the same time. and lets not mention trying to network for file and printer sharing between that and an XP machine.

    So no, Depends i suppose on people, their systems and what they do. For me, its gone smoother then I hoped. And it is a fresh release. It can only get better with updates. (And people, check incase your Mac needs Firmware updates from apple. Mine apparently doesn't, and, if memory serves me correct, might be one of the only ones that don't):apple:
     
  17. hajime macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2007
    #18
    As Safari is slower in SL, how about using Firefox instead? Will that solve the problem?
     
  18. designgeek macrumors 65816

    designgeek

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2009
    Location:
    "Town"
    #19
    I kinda figured most of the "SL sucks" threads were started by the secret Micro$oft trolls on the forums. I'm still waiting to figure out my situation so I can get it. Does anyone know if it improves HandBrake performance or do we need an upgrade from HandBrake's devs?
     
  19. snakesqzns macrumors regular

    snakesqzns

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2007
    #20
    That could be a workaround.. not a solution though. I'll have to try running Safari in 32-bit mode to see if it's faster.
     
  20. Kristenn macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2009
    #21
    I did a clean install of SL when I got it on the 28th and I even booted to 64 bit kernel. It seems to work really good for me. Much faster and I do like the little changes on the looks here and there. I have not had really any problems getting my old programs I use to work either. I was worried snow leopard would be a big mess but I am actually really impressed. It could been much much more bad. My dad was surprised to!
     
  21. tabasco70 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Location:
    Japan
    #22
    You hear people complaining about SL because:

    If it's not working for them, (more lag, beachballing, incompatibility, etc) then they post questions here. Or write articles/blog posts.

    If it does work, they keep quiet. They don't start a thread saying "Snow Leopard does everything it was advertised to do! Yay!" Because that would be dumb.

    You do find articles though, about how Snow Leopard is a good upgrade.
     
  22. SPG macrumors 65816

    SPG

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2001
    Location:
    In the shadow of the Space Needle.
    #23
    Why I'm trying to downgrade back to 10.5

    I think that for most people this upgrade will be quite nice with maybe a couple of hiccups. For me it has been a nightmare.
    -A high end encoding system that I have hooked up doesn't work anymore.
    -EyeTV will only work if I pay ElGato another pile of money to buy a 10.6 compatible software package.
    -No more AppleTalk which is the only way to directly connect to an OS9 machine.
    -Stability issues with MS excel spreadsheets.

    Other than the EyeTV nonsense I need the rest of these things all day long to get my work done. I'll probably upgrade my laptop and my home machine, but no way am I going to be able to use 10.6 for work for some time.
     
  23. mysterytramp macrumors 65816

    mysterytramp

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2008
    Location:
    Maryland
    #24
    SL is doing fine. Installed last night. Did NOT erase drive first -- as appears to be conventional wisdom here -- and went the chicken's way with a simple upgrade.

    No serious issues so far. It "uninstalled" my Hyperspace screen saver, but that's pretty minor. Software seems to work great.

    Nope, it's not bad at all. Report back to Redmond that Lauren the Laptop Hunter might want that MacBook after all.

    mt
     
  24. lannister80 macrumors 6502

    lannister80

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2009
    Location:
    Chicagoland
    #25
    xbench is a joke and hasn't been updated in eons. And I got back 10GB of disk space when I upgraded. YMMV.
     

Share This Page