Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

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

I'm really not getting my hopes to far up speed increase wise with the snow leopard. Even evry time i upgraded my mac's hardware wise the difference was not even that big as i expectted, i went from a 2,7 liquid cooled g5 to an 8 core 2,8 mac pro , and i was a bit dissapointed with it.
It's a great machine don't get me wrong but still there are the beachballs and stuff like that, of course video encoding and decoding goes faster but overall use feeels sort of the same.
But maybe the software is were the great gain can be made now and that is why they chose to go for a snow leopard to speed things up software wise, i'll guess we will know in 6 months ;-).
 
richthomas said:
^ 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.
Click to expand...

It's slow to respond, it uses far too many resources, and it has some heinous bugs in it. One of my favourites: If you copy a folder with several thousand files and subfolders and it hits one problem, it'll stop the copy completely. The only way around it is to use the terminal to do any copying, and it'll notify you when a copy fails on a given file, and continues doing what it's supposed to after that.
 
Data said:
I'm really not getting my hopes to far up speed increase wise with the snow leopard. Even evry time i upgraded my mac's hardware wise the difference was not even that big as i expectted, i went from a 2,7 liquid cooled g5 to an 8 core 2,8 mac pro , and i was a bit dissapointed with it.
It's a great machine don't get me wrong but still there are the beachballs and stuff like that, of course video encoding and decoding goes faster but overall use feeels sort of the same.
But maybe the software is were the great gain can be made now and that is why they chose to go for a snow leopard to speed things up software wise, i'll guess we will know in 6 months ;-).
Click to expand...

Overall usage speed improvements would require Apple to get off their ass and write decent code. Don't hold your breath ;)
 
grue said:
It's slow to respond, it uses far too many resources, and it has some heinous bugs in it. One of my favourites: If you copy a folder with several thousand files and subfolders and it hits one problem, it'll stop the copy completely. The only way around it is to use the terminal to do any copying, and it'll notify you when a copy fails on a given file, and continues doing what it's supposed to after that.
Click to expand...

my Finder is very snappy and is hardly using any resources; 0% CPU usage and 10 MB of real memory usage while idling on my MacBook Pro which only reboots for Boot Camp and updates. only annoying thing is Quick Look previews taking a while to load in Cover Flow which probably has something to do with me having < 2GB of memory.

fair enough on the copying issue. but doesnt a stop and continue window pop up? what happens when you press continue?
 
richthomas said:
my Finder is very snappy and is hardly using any resources; 0% CPU usage and 10 MB of real memory usage while idling on my MacBook Pro which only reboots for Boot Camp and updates. only annoying thing is Quick Look previews taking a while to load in Cover Flow which probably has something to do with me having < 2GB of memory.

fair enough on the copying issue. but doesnt a stop and continue window pop up? what happens when you press continue?
Click to expand...

No stop and continue, it simply fails hard.

It's a hell of a lot better in Leopard than it has been in OS X revisions past, but it's still unacceptable how long it takes for it to calculate sizes and such.
 
alexbates said:
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
Click to expand...

Indeed, because Windows 7 is actually looking to very good (even in its current pre-beta form). They showed it running very well on a netbook.

I'm really excited about both Snow Leopard and Windows 7. :D
 
Data said:
I'm really not getting my hopes to far up speed increase wise with the snow leopard. Even evry time i upgraded my mac's hardware wise the difference was not even that big as i expectted, i went from a 2,7 liquid cooled g5 to an 8 core 2,8 mac pro , and i was a bit dissapointed with it.
Click to expand...

Try running 64-Bit Windows Vista SP1 on it. It blows Leopard out of the water. At least it does so on my Quad Core Mac Pro with 8 GB RAM - and Leopard already is running very well on that machine and it also is fun to use. But still, Vista 64 SP1 runs even better.

64-Bit Vista is a completely different beast than its slow 32-Bit sibling. It seems that the guys at Microsoft spend the five years developing the 64-Bit version and the 32-Bit edition was just an afterthought; it's difficult to come up with a better explanation for the huge performance difference between both architecture versions.

To be honest, there are only two reasons keeping me from going back to Windows: The large investment in software for OS X that I've made in the last few years and the fact that I still find Windows's bubble boxes very annoying when they pop up every few minutes.

However, my early 2007 Mac Pro is a great 64-Bit Windows machine, although Apple does not officially support 64-Bit Vista on it. But since Vista does not know that, it still runs perfectly. (Except for Bluetooth, you don't even need the bloody BootCamp drivers to get everything running.) ;-)
 
Winni said:
Try running 64-Bit Windows Vista SP1 on it. It blows Leopard out of the water. At least it does so on my Quad Core Mac Pro with 8 GB RAM - and Leopard already is running very well on that machine and it also is fun to use. But still, Vista 64 SP1 runs even better.

64-Bit Vista is a completely different beast than its slow 32-Bit sibling. It seems that the guys at Microsoft spend the five years developing the 64-Bit version and the 32-Bit edition was just an afterthought; it's difficult to come up with a better explanation for the huge performance difference between both architecture versions.

To be honest, there are only two reasons keeping me from going back to Windows: The large investment in software for OS X that I've made in the last few years and the fact that I still find Windows's bubble boxes very annoying when they pop up every few minutes.

However, my early 2007 Mac Pro is a great 64-Bit Windows machine, although Apple does not officially support 64-Bit Vista on it. But since Vista does not know that, it still runs perfectly. (Except for Bluetooth, you don't even need the bloody BootCamp drivers to get everything running.) ;-)
Click to expand...

Well let's hope that the programmers at Apple are doing the same thing with snow leopard getting that to run really fast at 64 bit then , windows is not an option for me for the same reason, investments in software and hard ware over the years ;-).
 
Winni said:
Try running 64-Bit Windows Vista SP1 on it. It blows Leopard out of the water. At least it does so on my Quad Core Mac Pro with 8 GB RAM - and Leopard already is running very well on that machine and it also is fun to use. But still, Vista 64 SP1 runs even better.

64-Bit Vista is a completely different beast than its slow 32-Bit sibling. It seems that the guys at Microsoft spend the five years developing the 64-Bit version and the 32-Bit edition was just an afterthought; it's difficult to come up with a better explanation for the huge performance difference between both architecture versions.

To be honest, there are only two reasons keeping me from going back to Windows: The large investment in software for OS X that I've made in the last few years and the fact that I still find Windows's bubble boxes very annoying when they pop up every few minutes.

However, my early 2007 Mac Pro is a great 64-Bit Windows machine, although Apple does not officially support 64-Bit Vista on it. But since Vista does not know that, it still runs perfectly. (Except for Bluetooth, you don't even need the bloody BootCamp drivers to get everything running.) ;-)
Click to expand...

Amen. The difference between 64-bit Windows and 32-bit Windows feels like night and day.
 
Stridder44 said:
Amen. The difference between 64-bit Windows and 32-bit Windows feels like night and day.
Click to expand...

vista's superfetch is actually useful when you have alot of ram. Windows has so many more 64bit apps than osx. Apple really needs to get on the ball.
 
I wish there was another way to get the lastest build of Snow Leopard other than paying 499 bucks to get the Developers Preview.

HAHAHA I love testing out new OS, but I just don't have the funds to do it! I wish Apple made a program just for people who wanted to test out the lastest builds!

-iGrant
 
iGrant said:
I wish there was another way to get the lastest build of Snow Leopard other than paying 499 bucks to get the Developers Preview.

HAHAHA I love testing out new OS, but I just don't have the funds to do it! I wish Apple made a program just for people who wanted to test out the lastest builds!

-iGrant
Click to expand...

So, you like pain?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back