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

Leopard ready for prime time? Time to switch?

OldCorpse

OldCorpse

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Dec 7, 2005
1,758
348
compost heap
I'm still on Tiger, 10.4.11. I have consciously avoided Leopard so far for the following reasons:

1)My hardware is older - G4 (PPC) 1.33Ghz and 1.5Ghz with 1.5GB RAM. So no Intel here. My understanding is that Leopard is SLOWER on older PPC machines than Tiger (a first for OS X, before that, every OS upgrade was faster on older hardware). I don't want to slow down my computers - has Leopard sped up on PPC machines, or is it still the pig that it ever was?

2)Bugs, bugs, bugs. Compared to Tiger 10.4.11, Leopard was full of bugs. Has the 10.5.4 version finally killed most bugs? Is it now as stable as 10.4.11? I still keep reading about networking problems and problems with WiFi.

3)A lot of apps did not make the transition to Leopard, or didn't work as well as under Tiger. How are things standing today?

I've thought about waiting to try Leopard when I buy new hardware sometime next year, by which time the "real" Leopard (Snow) will come out. However, in your experience, has Leopard finally surpassed Tiger? Is Leopard ready for prime time?
 
You know, I hadn't noticed it until you asked the question, but 10.5.4 has been rock-solid for me. My AirDrives are all working. In fact, everything is working perfectly. Once iPhone firmware 2,1 comes out, I'm not really going to have to think about my OS and tweaks and workarounds anymore.

Yeah, it's frigging great now.
 
I wouldn't bother with leopard on your hardware, its probably better getting a new computer with SnowL when it out.

I think it will run fine, Im running it on my 1.5 Core Solo Mac Mini with 1.25G RAM. But I just don't see the necessity or absolute attractions compare to Tiger, which Im running now on my MB.

Other than darker, grayer UI, Time machine I never use, Space that isn't convenient to initiate and control, warning when trying to run newly installed app, warning on every freaking time when emptying the trash can. I really see no differences on my machine, I would expect even less on your G4.....
 
OldCorpse said:
I'm still on Tiger, 10.4.11. I have consciously avoided Leopard so far for the following reasons:

...
Click to expand...
I'm with Lord Zedd. Your three "reasons" appear to be more like three "classes of rumors." There is one real reason to avoid upgrading to Leopard and it may apply to you as the owner of a PPC-based Mac. Leopard does not support Classic. If you have a mission-critical Classic app, then you need a MacOS X substitute before you can upgrade. If there is no substitute, then you cannot upgrade.

This is the situation that I am in. On my PPC-based Mac, I will stick with Tiger until I can develop a migration strategy, even it means keeping an older machine around. On my Intel-based Mac, Classic is not an issue. My upgrade to Leopard and subsequent updates have gone flawlessly.
 
BongoBanger said:
Sure, that's why it's had four service packs already.
Click to expand...
And Tiger is better because its had 11 service packs? :rolleyes:

I've used it since the WWDC developer preview in 2006 on my G4 Mini and PowerMacG5 without any problems.

1)My hardware is older - G4 (PPC) 1.33Ghz and 1.5Ghz with 1.5GB RAM. So no Intel here. My understanding is that Leopard is SLOWER on older PPC machines than Tiger (a first for OS X, before that, every OS upgrade was faster on older hardware). I don't want to slow down my computers - has Leopard sped up on PPC machines, or is it still the pig that it ever was?
Click to expand...
1.33 and 1.5 are more than enough to run Leopard very well. The speed difference is close to 0%. The only way you will notice a speed difference is in benchmarks, in the real world there is no difference.

2)Bugs, bugs, bugs. Compared to Tiger 10.4.11, Leopard was full of bugs. Has the 10.5.4 version finally killed most bugs? Is it now as stable as 10.4.11? I still keep reading about networking problems and problems with WiFi.
Click to expand...
There never were any bugs, just a few people that didn't like some of the changes the updated OS had.

3)A lot of apps did not make the transition to Leopard, or didn't work as well as under Tiger. How are things standing today?
Click to expand...
99% of applications don't need to make a "transition" to Leopard. The only ones that do are ones that deal with the OS (utilities, control panels, etc.).

What it comes down to is you've fallen for many of the internet myths made by old farts that don't like change. Leopard is a great OS and the only reason to stick with Tiger is if you still cling to some ancient Classic applications. I weaned myself of Classic since 2001 and I haven't looked back since. The only classic software I use today is The Clock running on my 8mhz Mac Classic.
 
OldCorpse said:
I'm still on Tiger, 10.4.11. I have consciously avoided Leopard so far for the following reasons:

1)My hardware is older - G4 (PPC) 1.33Ghz and 1.5Ghz with 1.5GB RAM. So no Intel here. My understanding is that Leopard is SLOWER on older PPC machines than Tiger (a first for OS X, before that, every OS upgrade was faster on older hardware). I don't want to slow down my computers - has Leopard sped up on PPC machines, or is it still the pig that it ever was?
Click to expand...

I've run 10.5 on 1GHz G4, it runs faster than 10.4

OldCorpse said:
2)Bugs, bugs, bugs. Compared to Tiger 10.4.11, Leopard was full of bugs. Has the 10.5.4 version finally killed most bugs? Is it now as stable as 10.4.11? I still keep reading about networking problems and problems with WiFi.
Click to expand...

you're asking if an OS with 10 updates is more stable than one with 3?


OldCorpse said:
3)A lot of apps did not make the transition to Leopard, or didn't work as well as under Tiger. How are things standing today?
Click to expand...

Adobe apps had some issues, everything has been fine for a while.
 
I have to agree with the majority of people here. I have been running 10.5 since its launch day and honestly in my experiences its been flawless.

It hasnt crashed ONCE
ALL the software I used on 10.4 worked in 10.5
It wasnt noticably slower on my new macbook

But in the sense of i leopard is worth it... I'd say no, wait for snow leopard. Leopard really doesnt have that much to it that makes you NEED it. If you have lived this long without it, you dont need it now. ONly thing i can think of that leopard has and is something I would truly miss if i didnt have anymore, and thats quicklook/the new finder.
 
BongoBanger said:
Sure, that's why it's had four service packs already.
Click to expand...
Apple does not use the term Service Pack. That is Microsoft language. If you want to equate an update and Update with a Service Pack and bug fixes, then it does not scan. A MacOS X 10.5.x release may contain new functionality, new hardware support, or security upgrades, or bug fixes. Generally, security upgrades do not move MacOS X 10.5.x to MacOS X 10.5.(x+1).

Long story short—there is little correlation between the value of x and the number of revisions.
 
I ran Leopard on my 1.33 GHz iBook G4 for a while, so maybe I can help.

1. It's...tolerable. Granted, I only have 512 MB of RAM, but even so, I was not impressed by the speed drop, to say the least.

2. And it is still full of bugs, it just has less then it did a few months ago. Wireless issues are still rampant.

3. It's pretty much a non-issue now, most apps have been made usable in leopard.

Hope this helps. I run Tiger now, but I hope you're happy with Leopard should you choose to upgrade.
 
Thank you everybody for the feedback. I think my hardware is just too old for Leopard. So far, Tiger does everything I need. I would upgrade to Leopard if there were tangible gains, but it does not look so, especially given my hardware.

So for now I'll stay with Tiger on my old machines. By the time I'm ready to buy new gear, sometime next year, I'll probably do so with Snow Leopard on board. By then, hopefully most of the remaining bugs will have been quashed.

In any case, I think more powerful hardware will be a better fit for 10.5 (or maybe they'll call SL 10.6).

Again, thanks to everyone!
 
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