Latest Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard Builds Still Have Work to be Done

[seashellz]

I can wait until next June if SNOWLEOPARD isnt the Debacle-on-launch that 10.5 was; at 10.5.5 I still have various issues. And then theres that damn 10 year wait for permission repair.

10.5.6 reported "no known issues" over 2 weeks ago.
No 10.5.6
No seeds
No word

 

[flashy-cat]

Cocoa is a flavor of Objective-C, the programming language in which Mac OS X apps are written.

That's not quite true. Cocoa is Apple's name for the collection of software development frameworks, APIs, and accompanying runtimes that make up the development layer of Mac OS X.

 

[sfh]

I just hope they give the devs plenty of time to reveal the bugs and find fixes for them... I don't mind the wait I have the most stable OS in my office

 

[thejadedmonkey]

I'd love something to edit tags of different file formats within Finder, almost like Windows Vista.

So like, you click an MP3 file for example, and a drawer slides out the bottom or the side of the Finder window, allowing you to change Artist, song name, album, composer, year and such...

Cool, I won't get Vista with Win7 right around the corner, but this is looking like it'll be a quite expensive summer... Snow Leopard, Win 7, and SC2 all around the same time...

 

[jackfrost123]

Cool, I won't get Vista with Win7 right around the corner, but this is looking like it'll be a quite expensive summer... Snow Leopard, Win 7, and SC2 all around the same time...

What is sc2?

 

[Mackilroy]

I can wait until next June if SNOWLEOPARD isnt the Debacle-on-launch that 10.5 was; at 10.5.5 I still have various issues. And then theres that damn 10 year wait for permission repair.

10.5.6 reported "no known issues" over 2 weeks ago.
No 10.5.6
No seeds
No word

I've never had a single issue with any version of 10.5. It wasn't nearly a big of a debacle as your words claim.

As for 10.5.6, it'll come when it comes. Patience is a virtue.

What is sc2?

Starcraft 2.

 

[MrCrowbar]

I'm not sure that he is - from his phrasing it sounds like all intels post-GMA 950 are capable. This would indicate that the newer white books with the GMA X3100 specs are capable (Santa Rosa onward)

Would be nice to get clarification to be sure though.

I know that the Intel GMA 950 can't do DX10. Not sure about the GMA X3100.

I expect there will be a big speed improvement with Snow Leopard nevertheless, even with the first Intel Macs.

 

[MrCrowbar]

Cool, I won't get Vista with Win7 right around the corner, but this is looking like it'll be a quite expensive summer... Snow Leopard, Win 7, and SC2 all around the same time...

I hear ya! I'm excited about Starcraft 2, too. Actually it got me into playing the first one again, Blizzard ist still patching it almost every month. It's awesome on network.

My hardware (see sig) won't run SC2, but it runs liquid war (google it). That game is awesome and you can play with 6 people on the same computer. It's insanely simple and fun!

 

[grue]

"…areas that are undergoing ongoing revisions include power management for notebooks and 64-bit support"

I'm slightly confused by this. Are they implying that 64bit support isn't fully implemented yet? I was under the impression that Snow Leopard is to be a 64bit ONLY release. (Thus perhaps not having a retardedly bloated install like Leopard…)

 

[MShock]

"…areas that are undergoing ongoing revisions include power management for notebooks and 64-bit support"

I'm slightly confused by this. Are they implying that 64bit support isn't fully implemented yet? I was under the impression that Snow Leopard is to be a 64bit ONLY release. (Thus perhaps not having a retardedly bloated install like Leopard…)

my interpretation is that the new 64-bit kernal needs a lot of polish.

 

[grue]

my interpretation is that the new 64-bit kernal needs a lot of polish.

Hopefully you're right. I've been waiting for a lightweight OS X version for a while now

 

[-hh]

One of the nice things about Tiger was that it was current for a long time. Once they worked out the bugs, we had a stable OS X for several years, and it was wonderful.

"was"? Tiger is still doing fine for some of us...

I've been sticking with Tiger--and a lot of older versions of apps--because of all issues with Leopard.

Personally, I didn't find Leopard all that compelling ... overall, it appears to me to mostly be a couple of Desktop/Finder UI tweaks and it introduced Time Machine to try to replace my existing data backup utility; adding RAM was a better value for me.

Ditto for a lot of the more recent Applications updates. Big Yawn and a glance at the price tag ... gosh, I think that I'll pass and buy the next one.

Maybe MS got the clue when they slashed Mac Office for Black Friday; now if Adobe would only do the same (still peeved that I own all the individual licences in the 'Creative Suite', but since I didn't buy them as a cheaper CS bundle, I'm not eligible for the cheaper CS upgrade price...how's that for a double-whammy?).


-hh

 

[grue]

(still peeved that I own all the individual licences in the 'Creative Suite', but since I didn't buy them as a cheaper CS bundle, I'm not eligible for the cheaper CS upgrade price...how's that for a double-whammy?).[/I]


-hh

Call them. I was in a similar boat and they sold me a full version of CS3 (at the time) for a substantial discount.

 

[Quillz]

"was"? Tiger is still doing fine for some of us...




Personally, I didn't find Leopard all that compelling ... overall, it appears to me to mostly be a couple of Desktop/Finder UI tweaks and it introduced Time Machine to try to replace my existing data backup utility; adding RAM was a better value for me.

Ditto for a lot of the more recent Applications updates. Big Yawn and a glance at the price tag ... gosh, I think that I'll pass and buy the next one.

Maybe MS got the clue when they slashed Mac Office for Black Friday; now if Adobe would only do the same (still peeved that I own all the individual licences in the 'Creative Suite', but since I didn't buy them as a cheaper CS bundle, I'm not eligible for the cheaper CS upgrade price...how's that for a double-whammy?).


-hh

I don't know... Leopard actually added quite a bit to Mac OS X. It brought true 64-bit support, Core Animation and a lot of user interface improvements. I can certainly understand why someone would prefer to stick with Tiger, as it's proven and works, but Leopard was much more than just "Desktop tweaks."

 

[seashellz]

>>>I've never had a single issue with any version of 10.5. It wasn't nearly a big of a debacle as your words claim.

Speak for yourself


>>>>As for 10.5.6, it'll come when it comes...
Sage observation--If it came out even one minute BEFORE that point-I would be worried sick

 

[Catfish_Man]

"…areas that are undergoing ongoing revisions include power management for notebooks and 64-bit support"

I'm slightly confused by this. Are they implying that 64bit support isn't fully implemented yet? I was under the impression that Snow Leopard is to be a 64bit ONLY release. (Thus perhaps not having a retardedly bloated install like Leopard…)

Your impression is incorrect. 32 bit machines are supported fine. The install is smaller, but that's for other reasons.

 

[twoodcc]

glad to see that another build has been seeded! means that we're one step closer to snow leopard! i hope we get to see a lot more about it at macworld

 

[MrCrowbar]

"…areas that are undergoing ongoing revisions include power management for notebooks and 64-bit support"

I'm slightly confused by this. Are they implying that 64bit support isn't fully implemented yet? I was under the impression that Snow Leopard is to be a 64bit ONLY release. (Thus perhaps not having a retardedly bloated install like Leopard…)

Leopard isn't 64 bit on all the levels. Yes, I know they touted TIger to be "64 bit", then Leopard was even more "64 bit". In Snow Leopard, the actual Kernel (the core of the operating system) is 64 bit, so it can actually make use of the 64 bit CPU (Core 2) on a deeper level. Leopard only "supports" 64 bit you might say, Snow Leopard actually runs on 64 bit (and 32). Even on a 32 bit System (Macbook in my signature), there's worlds of difference between Leopard and the current Snow Leopard seed, so don't worry, even your old Intel Mac will get a nice boost.

If you want a more elaborate explanation, it's all here: http://www.appleinsider.com/article...c_os_x_snow_leopard_64_bit_to_the_kernel.html

 

[grue]

Leopard isn't 64 bit on all the levels. Yes, I know they touted TIger to be "64 bit", then Leopard was even more "64 bit". In Snow Leopard, the actual Kernel (the core of the operating system) is 64 bit, so it can actually make use of the 64 bit CPU (Core 2) on a deeper level. Leopard only "supports" 64 bit you might say, Snow Leopard actually runs on 64 bit (and 32). Even on a 32 bit System (Macbook in my signature), there's worlds of difference between Leopard and the current Snow Leopard seed, so don't worry, even your old Intel Mac will get a nice boost.

If you want a more elaborate explanation, it's all here: http://www.appleinsider.com/article...c_os_x_snow_leopard_64_bit_to_the_kernel.html

Fair enough. I hadn't looked into it much, I was hoping it was a "screw the past, onward to the future" type thing.

 

[alexbates]

I just hope they give the devs plenty of time to reveal the bugs and find fixes for them... I don't mind the wait I have the most stable OS in my office

I hope the same thing. I have 10.5.5 and my Mac seems to have more problems than anytime in the past three years I've had it.

Vista has no chance of surviving after Snow Leopard. Hopefully converting most of the apps to cocoa will require less memory than ever before.

Does anyone know if the Finder is supposed to be converted to Cocoa?

 

[AidenShaw]

Vista has no chance of surviving after Snow Leopard.

Perhaps you've noticed that Windows 7 and OSX 10.6 are coming out at about the same time?

No, I'm sure that you haven't noticed....

 

[Catfish_Man]

Hopefully converting most of the apps to cocoa will require less memory than ever before.

It's an interesting thing to consider. I'm unsure on it myself. There's factors that would indicate higher memory usage (64 bit, and Cocoa itself not being all that svelte in certain ways), and factors that would indicate lower memory usage (all the ones I can remember right now are NDA'd, but they are there). My expectation is that they're aiming for an overall improvement in memory usage despite 64 bit, but we'll see.

Does anyone know if the Finder is supposed to be converted to Cocoa?

It is; I suspect this is largely because of the move to 64 bit, since all the Carbon UI APIs are absent in 64 bit apps.

 

[grue]

Here's to hoping the 10.6 Finder isn't the bloated, buggy pile of crap we've grown to expect lately…

 

[richard.mac]

^ Finder is bloated and buggy? on the contrary i find it very lightweight and never hangs like Tiger's Finder used to do in some situations.

 

[alexbates]

Perhaps you've noticed that Windows 7 and OSX 10.6 are coming out at about the same time?

No, I'm sure that you haven't noticed....

No, I didn't know that. It's going to be interesting to see how Windows 7 compares to Vista, and how Windows 7 compares to OSX 10.6