Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
OS X 10.5.7 Build 9J34 Seeded to Developers
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Ars Technica says "a late-March or possibly early-April release." So everyone is guessing, but my guess is that a single Safari compatibility issue won't hold up the release very long.
J
jmadlena
Guest
Maybe Safari 4 will be mature by then and ready for release
It wouldn't be unheard of for Apple to release a major Safari revision for a current Mac OS X.
Apparently it is coming in Snow Leopard, here.
Also in iWeb 09 they changed a few things and one of the steps they suggest is changing your gamma to 2.2, here
Gamma change is comming I believe, it would make sense for them to put it in the last update to Leopard (I'm not saying that this is the last update to Leopard).
Changing the gamma is one of the first things I do when setting up a mac. I'd be glad to see this as default.
Definitely - the default gamma has always looked a bit washed out. I always re-calibrate to 2.2... much deeper and richer colours and blacks.
But wonder if there will be any enhancements to the Finder etc with the gamma changing to 2.2? Is that why iTunes 8.1 looked brighter compared to everything else, because that way on 2.2 it'll look the same as it did on 1.8?
Lol
I'm wheel grad too... who you gunna car LOL
i am grad to see the improvement of mail.app.
I'm wheel grad too... who you gunna car LOL
Also, if the gamma changes to 2.2 gamma in Mac OS 10.5.7, then hopefully Mac OS X will look proper with it. If iTunes 8.1 is lighter as people claim it is, then do it for the whole system as well. Pre-Mac OS 10.5.7, changing the gamma to 2.2 made the whole system look dark.
Does anyone have any idea what kind of improvements are coming for flash? Flash is still much better on Tiger than on Leopard.
i have had my aluminum macbook 2.4 since Dec 08 and i just looked at my gamma and it is set on 2.2?
maybe i played with it at some point but i dont recall every changing it?
maybe i played with it at some point but i dont recall every changing it?
Most MacBook owners on MR's change their gamma to 2.2 because it makes the screen look less washed out. You'll have changed it yourself/maybe used someone else's colour calibration.
thanks
probably read it at some point and changed. hahaha i am always reading and tinkering and just forgot i did it.
I hate 2.2 gamma on traditional matte displays. It might look good on glossy new displays, I wouldn't know because I only have matte displays, but I sure hope they include both calibrations that the end user can easily choose from.
I used to calibrate to 2.2 gamma on my old matte MBP too. Glossy or matte, it makes the colours deeper and less washed out.
But it is what you prefer or what true calibration you use I guess.. You can easily switch to 1.8 gamma if you found 2.2 not suitable though.
I often calibrate MacBooks, etc. when I see them in stores - I've always felt it was a shame that with the big deal with OS X and Quartz, anti-aliasing, etc., the default calibration just fails and makes it look pretty bad - at least Leopard introduced defaulting to 'best for main display' for anti-aliasing.
2.2 makes a decent difference, but where is everyone looking to see/change just the gamma without going through calibration all over again?
2.2 makes a decent difference, but where is everyone looking to see/change just the gamma without going through calibration all over again?
Not that I know of - after changing my gamma setting to 2.2, I like the new colors much better.
I've been using 1.8 for the past 3 years. I just changed to 2.2 and I think the colors look better.