This is the same pace as Panther. 10.3.1 came out 2 weeks after the Panther release, and 10.3.2 came out a month after 10.3.1.VicMacs said:at this pace in a year well be on 10.4.24
BWhaler said:Please, please, please Apple make this an enormous bug fixing debate.
I want to love Tiger. I really do. But it is still beta quality. The number and severity of bugs is painful.
Sure, I am happy that another release is coming soon. I just hope it is not another anemic bug fix.
Make .2 the 100mb+ patch Tiger desparately needs. I don't want to be waiting for 10.4.5 for what should of been the gold version of Tiger.
BWhaler said:Please, please, please Apple make this an enormous bug fixing debate.
I want to love Tiger. I really do. But it is still beta quality. The number and severity of bugs is painful.
Sure, I am happy that another release is coming soon. I just hope it is not another anemic bug fix.
Make .2 the 100mb+ patch Tiger desparately needs. I don't want to be waiting for 10.4.5 for what should of been the gold version of Tiger.
melgross said:It would have been nice if Apple waited on the release and fixed this stuff first.
I expect updates, but we shouldn't have to need two in the first month after release. If they held the release, they could have worked both .1 and .2 into the initial release. It's easier, and takes less time to fix things before release, then it does to close down development, remove the bug code, release it, and then to pull code, and fix bugs, write the installer for it---twice.
I've done this before. It's a lot more work.
Are you all some of the same people who were screaming "I want Tiger now!" just a couple months ago?BWhaler said:Please, please, please Apple make this an enormous bug fixing debate.
I want to love Tiger. I really do. But it is still beta quality. The number and severity of bugs is painful.
Sure, I am happy that another release is coming soon. I just hope it is not another anemic bug fix.
Make .2 the 100mb+ patch Tiger desparately needs. I don't want to be waiting for 10.4.5 for what should of been the gold version of Tiger.
rendezvouscp said:While I personally have had very few problems with Tiger (except that Studio MX 2004 and CS 2 refuse to install correctly), I know others will appreciate the bug fixes.
tech4all said:Anybody else having problems with installing Studio MX 2004 and Adobe CS 1 or 2? I have Tiger but haven't installed it yet, so I want to be sure.
tech4all said:Anybody else having problems with installing Studio MX 2004 and Adobe CS 1 or 2? I have Tiger but haven't installed it yet, so I want to be sure.
BWhaler said:Please, please, please Apple make this an enormous bug fixing debate.
I want to love Tiger. I really do. But it is still beta quality. The number and severity of bugs is painful.
Sure, I am happy that another release is coming soon. I just hope it is not another anemic bug fix.
Make .2 the 100mb+ patch Tiger desparately needs. I don't want to be waiting for 10.4.5 for what should of been the gold version of Tiger.
tech4all said:Anybody else having problems with installing Studio MX 2004 and Adobe CS 1 or 2? I have Tiger but haven't installed it yet, so I want to be sure.
Orlando Furioso said:Beta quality?
I guess my question is, are you having actual trouble with your OS or do you just like to complain?
Marble said:Yes! They are updating Display Preferences! I've been unable to change the brightness of my Powerbook's screen or change resolution for the last month!
sacear said:This (an article, and most likely more than just a rumour, about an update to the OS) is on Page 2 and "2GB and 4GB iPod Shuffles? (Unlikely)" is on Page 1??? Huh? Does anyone else think that is backwards?
Edit:
...after 10.4.9 (as you said with 10.3.x) comes 10.4.10, then 10.4.11, etc. What gets me about those who argue that there can't be a double digit, then what about the first number in the version... 10?! According to that logic Apple should have stopped their OS version numbering at OS 9! According to their logic the last possible version number of any software is 9.9.9. Then development just stops, I guess.
CaptainHaddock said:For my part, I really like Tiger, but it's definitely beta-quality. I currently have 24 bug reports listed at the Apple developer website, and these are just the ones that have caused me problems in my day-to-day use of Tiger.
sacear said:This (an article, and most likely more than just a rumour, about an update to the OS) is on Page 2 and "2GB and 4GB iPod Shuffles? (Unlikely)" is on Page 1??? Huh? Does anyone else think that is backwards?
Edit:
...after 10.4.9 (as you said with 10.3.x) comes 10.4.10, then 10.4.11, etc. What gets me about those who argue that there can't be a double digit, then what about the first number in the version... 10?! According to that logic Apple should have stopped their OS version numbering at OS 9! According to their logic the last possible version number of any software is 9.9.9. Then development just stops, I guess.
deanbo said:If 10.4's dot releases did go past 9 (double digits), that would be an awful lot of updates.
Also where's all the OpenGL improvements Apple's supposed to be working on?
Orlando Furioso said:Beta quality?
I know isues, large and minor, have surfaced in Tiger. But, other than Safari refusing to refresh a screen (yes, an annoying and major problem that needs to be addressed if it is common), I have had no problems with Tiger. All my apps ported over well enough and most importantly, work.
I just wonder how wonky your mac has to be behaving for you to consider Tiger a "beta release". So far for me it has benefited me more than Panther (and I assume the consensus is Panther has reached Gold standard long ago?), and I am enjoying the user experience again (though Panther was damn good already).
I guess my question is, are you having actual trouble with your OS or do you just like to complain?
sacear said:Are you all some of the same people who were screaming "I want Tiger now!" just a couple months ago?