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

Mac OS X 10.6.2 Build 10C519f Seeded to Developers

Leopard will stay the majority Mac OS for some time to come!

opeter said:
Well, I will still wait for 10.6.3 or even 10.6.4 update, before I even think of installing Snow Leopard for the first time on my Mac mini (I received the upgrade DVD almost a month ago).

The good old Leopard works great for me.
Click to expand...

The majority of the people I know are still using OS 10.4. The say that they willchange to OS 10.5 in the future but the future has not come yet. Those that have Intel Macs are about equal with the PPC Mac Users. I run 10.4 most of the time on my G4 PowerMac. I run 10.5 most of the time on my PPC PowerBook. My Intel Mac Pro runs 10.4 on rare occasions now. I only run 10.6 from an extra drive & then only for about an hour a day & never for business related work. That leaves 10.5 most of the time. Also even though I purchase all OS updates to be here the day they come out, using them for everyday work could take months if not years. I only started using 10.5 14-15 months ago. So with my income tax prep business it will be next May before I will even think of using 10.6 on a daily basis for real computer work.

I wonder how many others there is like me that Apple counts as updaters, but really do not use the newer software for their real computer work. I may do more of my web browsing with 10.6 so it looks like it it being used. But that is why one can use statistics to prove anything they want to.
 
So I guess it's safe to assume that next week sometimes 10.6.2 will be available for regular users too?
 
heisetax said:
Part of this change to Intel was supposed to be faster clock speed computers released on a shorter interval. IBM was given a bad time because they could not get to the 3 GHz speed level. The current Intel Mac Pro still is not to that level. They wre with my 3 GHz model & the next update 15+ months later to 3.2 GHz. But now they have a ways to go. So the idea of 3 GHz in a year still has not come true.

The iPhone will probably make 3 GHz first.
Click to expand...

You need to get up to date, nobody cares about the GHz anymore, that has been dead for at least 3 years by now. It's all about multicores and instructions per clock and so on nowadays.

A modern 2009 CPU at 2.0Ghz can process data much much faster than any 4.0-6.0GHz chips from a few generations ago.

Also, Apple did not switch to Intel because primarily IBM couldn't build 3GHz chips, they have other reasons. The fact is Intel was the smarter way to go with performance per watt, performance per clock and so on. IBM didn't have anything that was near in those fields. They could've build a 3.0Ghz chip no problem except it would be too frigging hot and consume so much power, it isn't funny. Apple wants a chip that can perform like 4.0ghz but is at 2.0ghz with low power consumption and less heat so that they can put things in thin profiles like iMacs and macbooks.
 
blackcrayon said:
I think you're rehashing the old "mhz myth"... With that logic, a Pentium 4 at 3Ghz must be just as fast as a core in a 3Ghz Nehalem, right? :) What Apple was referring to with IBM was getting the more or less same G5 that ran at 2.5 Ghz to run at 3 Ghz... Not getting a completely different chip architecture that gets much higher performance even at a lower or same clock speed...
Click to expand...

I don't think he's rehashing it. He's living it full swing. You see now why Intel went to the slower P4 architecture that was capable of higher clock speeds. It's because it makes for easy marketing. People see the big number and start foaming at the mouth.

The fact is, since about 2003, clock speeds haven't gone up. But it's exactly like you said, a 3.0 ghz processor from then gets trounced bad by one of the cores on a 3.0 ghz chip today.

MikhailT said:
You need to get up to date, nobody cares about the GHz anymore, that has been dead for at least 3 years by now. It's all about multicores and instructions per clock and so on nowadays.
Click to expand...

You're right and wrong. For one thing, this isn't something that's new or nowadays, it has always been about instructions per clock. That's why you had things like 386 SX and DX processors, stand-alone FPUs, the Pentium and Pentium Pro.

It's just that for the mass market, it always was about MHZ.

MikhailT said:
Also, Apple did not switch to Intel because primarily IBM couldn't build 3GHz chips, they have other reasons. The fact is Intel was the smarter way to go.
Click to expand...

Yes, the fact that there is no G5 chips in laptops is why Apple went to Intel moving forward.
 
jon08 said:
So I guess it's safe to assume that next week sometimes 10.6.2 will be available for regular users too?
Click to expand...

Not at all. There are still some significant known issues. Once there is a seed with no known issues, you can start to expect the seed within a week. But even then, it could be months (See 10.5.8).
 
Bsod?

Bill Casbo said:
I hope this update fixes the WindowServer issue. I get a BSOD at least 3 times a day! Apparently, Excel Office 2004 is lethal. It's a known Rosetta problem dating back even before SL and Apple should address it.
Click to expand...

How do you get BSOD on the Mac OS? is the screen actually Blue when it crashes?
This i gotta see.
 
Preferences hanging? Good God......do they have drunk monkey's doing coding now? Seriously.....how after dozens of point upgrades do you suddenly introduce a bug that crashes Preferences? :rolleyes:
 
pondosinatra said:
Preferences hanging? Good God......do they have drunk monkey's doing coding now? Seriously.....how after dozens of point upgrades do you suddenly introduce a bug that crashes Preferences? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Dozens of point upgrades? You do realize Snow Leopard is at 10.6.1 don't you? That would be ONE point update not dozens.
 
jon08 said:
So I guess it's safe to assume that next week sometimes 10.6.2 will be available for regular users too?
Click to expand...

It could be next week or next month or the month after that.

heisetax said:
I run 10.5 most of the time on my PPC PowerBook. My Intel Mac Pro runs 10.4 on rare occasions now. I only run 10.6 from an extra drive & then only for about an hour a day & never for business related work. That leaves 10.5 most of the time.
Click to expand...

What do you do for an hour a day on 10.6?
 
Mr. Wonderful said:
Not at all. There are still some significant known issues. Once there is a seed with no known issues, you can start to expect the seed within a week. But even then, it could be months (See 10.5.8).
Click to expand...

Oh, I thought it was going to be like last time when they seeded 10.6.1 to developers and a couple of days later it was available for the public too!
 
celticpride678 said:
I thought I was the only one with this issue. It seems not. Please Apple, fix it and all the other issues people are having with Snow Leopard.
Click to expand...

This is one of the minor quirks I've noticed too. I rarely use the 4 finger swipe, but I definitely have the same problem.
 
Eric S. said:
And of course that's the same thing we heard about 10.5.2 and Leopard. Let's face it, if you install these releases before the .2 version you're just signing up to be an Apple beta tester.
Click to expand...

With no major problems either. (My boot camp is running Windows 7 RC as well. I do not fear betas. :p)
 
jon08 said:
Oh, I thought it was going to be like last time when they seeded 10.6.1 to developers and a couple of days later it was available for the public too!
Click to expand...

Developers are often given multiple seeds before it goes public. With 10.6.1, there were a good half a dozen seeds to developers before it went public.
 
zw-gator said:
Almost a half a GB :eek:
Click to expand...

Anyone know if they plan on fixing OpenGL? Scores have dropped to almost half using xbench and don't tell this Ee, computer certified past IT person it doesn't matter. It does.
Example
past MacBooks
openGLscores;
70%
110%
140% switch from intel to nvidia gma
171% you could now run motion on a MacBook but still no gamin
two weeks later Pple release, quietly 1300x or x1300 and the score goes from 171%!down to 70% and yew, you guess it, no more motion on a MacBook. I don't have a MacBook but was fumed.
Why? Because other than motion it affected nothing else, you could still not play games nor run autocad,lol but it affected motion only.

So what did apple do when it came out with a better nvidia chip that ran motion, it removed FireWire and fanboys said it was a space issue. The mac, formally pc switchers knew better, there was plenty of space so in time the brought FireWire back so it threw the fanboys theory under a bus.


So waiting to see if they fix OpenGL as even the macpro have lower numbers then 10.5.8 does or 10.4.11. The better the OpenGL the better ven the screen redraw meaning no glitches when recording in 2d Logic. Yes it can be hard to wrap your head around as science is not for everyone but slow openGL has a snow ball affect on overall system performance.
Will benchmark all the various os's and post it here in a few minutes


Posted from iPhone. Sorry for spelling and grammar.

EDIT UPDATE: Okay, here is just a few examples, I ran xBench 3 times, normally divide by 3 to get an average, this time, I chose the highest as I have a wedding to attend at 4:00 Pacific.
Example for Audio, FPU combined with CPU, but leans more on FPU, determines how many virtual instruments you can use, example, Addictive Drums or EWQLSO (Orhestra Plug In)


10.5.7[/B]
CPU Test 145.70
FPB (I will use this from here on out as this means Floating Point Basic)=132.7
FPL (Floating Point Library) 146.86
OpenGL= 152.13
So this says the macbook 2.4 is 46% faster with 10.5.7, now to the next OS

Opps forgot 10.4.11
CPU=124.25
FPB= 135.41
FPL= 88.63 (this libray number is important as you'll see as we get to Snow Leopard, two different Hard Drives, same system)
OpenGL=136.37


10.5.8
CPU 146.82
FPB=133.17
FPL=146.56
OpenGL: 147.67

10.6.1 System 1 (yes I have snow installed twice, once with migration, once clean)
This is migration system where it copies all my programs'
CPU=163.87
FPB=130.72
FPL=260.71 HUGE JUMP, but not exactly what is needed for plug-ins or virtual instruments, but still very high and hope apple can take advantage off, haven't seen a great performance enhancement. Best was 10.5.8, lots of plug-ins.
OpnGL= 77.69, worse then a macbook when they took it down from 171% to 70% just to kill of MOTION users as you could never play games on it anyway, very greedy, as they still don't get the PRO SUMER in Audio/Video is a much larger market base and would sell millions of machines that were better than iMac and under a <ac Pro and that's without mentioning the sales the gaming would have as they make up more money sold then music and video combined. Apple has lost it sometimes, me thinketh.

10.6.1 CLEAN INSTALL
CPU 165.32
FPB= 133.45
FPL = 262.07
OpenGL:83.49


The good news though is that some other benchmarking programs show that in 64 bit mode, that a 2.4 is the same speed as a 2.8, but with Apple being Apple, let's see, would they rather give you a speed bump via software that almost increases by 20% or sell you a new machine? Another example, friend took computer to Apple store, was told his Powerbook G4 needed a new logic board as the tests all came back normal. Especially the RAM.

Knowing better, I removed the RAM he purchased, and sure enough, no problems, Apple sales people, be it Genius or trainers, are geared toward getting you to buy a new machine, even though they don't see a dime in commission.
It's part of their job, but more specialist's though.

STRANGE DAYS INDEED....

PEACE
 
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