Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Mac Apps and Mac App Store' started by clevin, Feb 8, 2010.
I'll drink to 10.4 being the best version of OS X ever.
I couldn't agree more. It ran wonderfully on my late-2006 plastic MacBook. It might have been buggy at the beginning, but soon it became any computer user's dream. It was simple and efficient. No flashy and processor-hungry elements.
I don't think that I use any of the new features of Leopard or Snow Leopard. Wait, Snow Leopard hasn't got any...
Honestly, I thought about going back to Tiger a couple of times recently.
No. Mac OS X Server 1.2 was extremely stable.
I wonder if they'll drop XP as well, sometime soon? It kind of surprises me, since a browser seems like an app that really wouldn't need tons of new OS APIs. OTOH, Apple seems to do very well with creating new APIs that developers want to use (viz. CoreImage plans from Adobe).
While 10.4 was the first Apple OS, I'd say that it was easily the best. When I look back, I was always impressed by its speed and abilities. When I made the switch from XP it was like a dream come true. It does hurt a little bit to see it losing Mozilla support..
They are considering dropping support for all pre-SP3 versions of XP...
I'll have one with you too ... Yay to 10.4
Definitely, my favorite Mac OS. It was filled with pointless eye-candy (3-D reflective Dock) and on 10.4.11 its extremely stable.
However, Snow Leopard is faster. It's more stable then Leopard (for me) and it has both features of Leopard and the speed of Tiger.
But I think if I ever get a new Mac, I'm putting Tiger back on my old one (For nostagalic reasons).
Tiger didn't have that annoying 3D reflective dock. This was introduced in Leopard. I liked Tiger a lot. Oh well, time goes on.
I skipped Leopard completely and have one computer with Tiger and one with Snow Leopard. I can't put my finger on it, but Leopard was just bloated and bulky.
Snow Leopard is still a tad too visually heavy ... I like the softer looks of Tiger.
Oops, I meant't 'It WASN'T filled with pointless eye-candy".
I also, like Splum, enjoy the Tiger look. That to me is true Mac OS X...not this new direction Apple is going with glossyness, eye-candy, and appealing the masses.
Tiger is my favorite Mac OS X flavor.
Simple and clean interface.
Leopard and Snow Leopard are too flashy for my tastes. I don't need to be entertained by the OS/Interface.
That's perfectly reasonable... even the 4GB SSD on my 701 can handle SP3 without problems....
XP still has 66% of market (netapplications), Mozilla can't really drop it.
I used Tiger for all of maybe five minutes before I installed the Leopard drop-in disc on my iMac, so I can't say I have much experience outside of trying it in stores. Regardless, it seemed nifty.
Newbies take note; this is how it's spelled. (Emphasis is mine.) Thanks, FSMBP.
Tiger was excellent. The fact that it could be installed on a 400 MHz iMac as well as a 2007 MacBook Pro really highlights its strengths as a quick and stable operating system. 10.4 was the last great Mac OS preceded by others such as 8.6 and 9.1. The only thing 10.6 has over Tiger is its shutdown time. DAMN, it's quick! =)
oh well, Life goes
I agree. Loads of netbooks still out there with XP.
These days, Tiger is best used on older PPC Macs, and even then just to run Classic... with that line of reasoning in mind, dropping Tiger support in future releases of Firefox and other Mozilla products makes sense (to me, at least). If nothing else, making this change now will prepare Mozilla better for Mac OS X 10.7, whenever that arrives.
yeah, mozilla said that there are many leopard only APIs that firefox can't use because of support for Tiger.
Ahh well. I guess them netbooks will have to get SP3 pretty sharpish then.