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

OS X Snow Leopard Retail Disc Contains Build 10A432

lannister80 said:
Bah, court rulings have already shown EULAs to be completely one-sided (I forget the legal term) and therefore unenforceable. "Shrink wrap" licenses are a joke.
Click to expand...

I know what you are referring to, which is why you can now return the opened software if you do not agree to the license, and the developer owes you a refund. Unless you have a link to an actual ruling that says EULAs are unenforceable?

IF YOU DO NOT
AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THE LICENSE, YOU MAY RETURN THE APPLE SOFTWARE TO THE PLACE WHERE YOU OBTAINED IT FOR A REFUND. IF THE APPLE
SOFTWARE WAS ACCESSED ELECTRONICALLY, CLICK "DISAGREE/DECLINE". FOR APPLE SOFTWARE INCLUDED WITH YOUR PURCHASE OF HARDWARE, YOU MUST
RETURN THE ENTIRE HARDWARE/SOFTWARE PACKAGE IN ORDER TO OBTAIN A REFUND.
Click to expand...
From the Leopard SLA: http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/macosx105.pdf
 
AidenShaw said:
We also haven't seen much software that benefits from 64-bits, either. Does Adobe Reader need to be x64 - no.

My octo Win7 system is running 64-bit notepad, 64-bit DOS CMD windows, 64-bit explorer - does that make it snappier?

As long as developers have to support 32-bit systems, it makes little sense to make 64-bit versions of apps that don't need it on Windows. (Windows doesn't have the TLB problem that the 32-bit kernel on OSX has.)




At this point, we'll just wait for the benchmarks to come in. If actual measurements show no benefit to the 64-bit kernel, then claims like this are valid.

On the other hand, if the benchmarks show that a 2 GiB system with the x64 kernel is faster on common, important apps - then the whiners will be vindicated.


...wait and see...
Click to expand...

Maybe XCode will gain the ability to compile Cocoa Apps in either. (As long as you dont have any specific C++ code Objective-C can be ported quickly and painlessly.
 
Quartz seems much slower on SL, that's the main reason I didn't believe A432 to be the GM, and other sites reviews started to appear they all have the same findings. Quartz is slower on SL.

You can easily notice that by opening 50+ folders at the same time and timing how long it took for Finder to render all the open windows. It takes almost twice as much time as on Leopard. So when people claim Finder to be more responsive, I wonder if they actually do the right tests.
 
TheSpaz said:
I don't think they said the install would be 6GB... they originally said that by installing Snow Leopard, you would free up 6GB of space on your hard drive. However, Apple has now changed it from 6GB to 7GB.

Lemme just reiterate: After installing Snow Leopard, you should have 7GB of extra unused space on your hard drive.
Click to expand...

Going from Leo to SL as an upgrade, I gained exactly 10GB of space on a MacBook Air.
 
S3rgin said:
Guys,

Engadget.com posted their review of Snow Leopard:

"Here's the thing about Snow Leopard, the single inescapable fact that hung over our heads as we ran our tests and took our screenshots and made our graphs: it's $30. $30! If you're a Leopard user you have virtually no reason to skip over 10.6, unless you've somehow built a mission-critical production workflow around an InputManager hack. (In which case, well, have fun with 10.5 for the rest of your life.)..."

Have a look at the entire review at:
http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/26/snow-leopard-review/

I've just noticed that Gizmodo posted their as well:
http://gizmodo.com/5346418/snow-leopard-review-lightened-and-enlightened

Cheers.
Click to expand...

hell, Snow Leopard makes my Core Duo MacBook pro with 1 gig 'o RAM run noticeably faster (no, not just the boot time) and i dont even care that im not going to be able to run 64-bit apps. worth the upgrade for me.
 
iBug2 said:
Quartz seems much slower on SL, that's the main reason I didn't believe A432 to be the GM, and other sites reviews started to appear they all have the same findings. Quartz is slower on SL.

You can easily notice that by opening 50+ folders at the same time and timing how long it took for Finder to render all the open windows. It takes almost twice as much time as on Leopard. So when people claim Finder to be more responsive, I wonder if they actually do the right tests.
Click to expand...

Because normal people don't open 50 windows then rush to a forum to whine about the 'terrible speed'. If Joe and Jane can watch their porn, send their email, tweak their photos and write a document - the fact that you can't open 50 windows without a slow down is pretty much of little interest of theirs.
 
iBookG4user said:
This really isn't that surprising if you think about it. But I hope that 10.6.1 comes out quickly and the bugs are fixed :)
Click to expand...

Me too. I installed golden master for testing purposes on one of my partitions ( I will buy it) as I have a copy, not clone, but a geniune hard Copy of the unlimited mac genius leopard install from a friend. Anyway, some OpenGL tests show it much slower, the spinng cubes in xbench are much slower ( will post all of the os marks so you can compare), but xplane does not work and off the top of my head I can't recall the others, but have seen the porgram go right to fail/report/ignore on several occasions.

This is particually hard when you are a musician or video editor as many of the plug INS might not work.

The good news is, a
MacBook pro 2.4 667 FSB geekbechs the same as a 2.8 32 bit system so your getting quite a bump in performance for $29 dollars. So now, when do the update come. ??? Also fwiw, apple didn't update their back of house critical computers used for daily d, employee log INS, tumbaktu, from tiger to leopard for almost 9 months.

My advice, install on a leopard partition first and if you use critical apps for your living, graphics, audio, video, you will want to wait until 10.6.2-3 before installing, and again on a clone partition to make sure what you use, worlds.

Also, fusion, VM, crashes. That's a rather large problem I would think, no?
 
UK USERS WILL GET SNOW LEOPARD ON FRIDAY! :D

Just got an email from Apple saying my order has been shipped!
 
macintoshtoffy said:
Because normal people don't open 50 windows then rush to a forum to whine about the 'terrible speed'. If Joe and Jane can watch their porn, send their email, tweak their photos and write a document - the fact that you can't open 50 windows without a slow down is pretty much of little interest of theirs.
Click to expand...

Rush? I noticed this speed issue with Quartz months ago. I'm an ADC member and Quartz have been slow for all the SL seeds so far.

Open GL seems pretty much the same so nobody will whine about their games running slower, but I think Quartz speed is really important for everyday workflow. A window rendering slower than before is, well, a window rendering slower than before.
 
iBug2 said:
Rush? I noticed this speed issue with Quartz months ago. I'm an ADC member and Quartz have been slow for all the SL seeds so far.

Open GL seems pretty much the same so nobody will whine about their games running slower, but I think Quartz speed is really important for everyday workflow. A window rendering slower than before is, well, a window rendering slower than before.
Click to expand...

I'd say that they'll do some optimisation over the next couple of updates - I'd sooner them get it functionally correct then focus on optimisation with the updates. What ever the case maybe, I'm using a wide variety of applications and haven't noticed a slow down - and that is using an Intel GMA X3100 based MacBook.

Have you checked it on other hardware whether it is a hardware/driver issue or whether it is a flat Quartz issue?
 
THX1139 said:
No one has been able to explain why they need 64bit on a laptop.
Click to expand...

If you read the responses of myself and some others you would see that, apart from being able to use lots of memory, the 64bit kernel stops the double TLB swapping that is inherent in Apple's kernel design, thus increasing core efficiency. Additionally, software can take benefit of the extra registers (Apple itself is claiming 50% performance jumps in Javascriptv - this does not use 32gb of memory!!!, and yet gets a significant boost), and something that is important, enhanced memory randomisation will make the kernel harder to compromise.

Again, this is technically offset with the greater overhead of the extra bits, and performance enhancements could well be subsumed by these balances.

Why are you blindly regurgitating the myth that 64bit kernels only benefits large memory machines???

Anyway, I'm still super excited to get my copy on Friday, and will be at the Apple store willingly giving my £25 for what is still the best OS in the world for my needs.
 
macintoshtoffy said:
I'd say that they'll do some optimisation over the next couple of updates - I'd sooner them get it functionally correct then focus on optimisation with the updates. What ever the case maybe, I'm using a wide variety of applications and haven't noticed a slow down - and that is using an Intel GMA X3100 based MacBook.

Have you checked it on other hardware whether it is a hardware/driver issue or whether it is a flat Quartz issue?
Click to expand...

I checked with 9600GT and 8800GT which are pretty much the same hardware. I don't have an ATI based mac to test though.
 
Just got the e-mail from Apple that my preorder of the Up To Date disc has been mailed (Apple Online Store Germany). So I guess I'll have it by tomorrow.
 
iBug2 said:
I checked with 9600GT and 8800GT which are pretty much the same hardware. I don't have an ATI based mac to test though.
Click to expand...

For what it is worth; here are the details for my MacBook System:

Platform: Mac OS X x86 (32-bit)
Compiler: GCC 4.0.1 (Apple Inc. build 5490)
Operating System: Mac OS X 10.6 (Build 10A432)
Model: MacBook (Early 2008)
Motherboard: Apple Inc. Mac-F22788A9 PVT
Processor: Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU T8300 @ 2.40GHz
Processor ID: GenuineIntel Family 6 Model 23 Stepping 6
Logical Processors: 2
Physical Processors: 1
Processor Frequency: 2.40 GHz
L1 Instruction Cache: 32.0 KB
L1 Data Cache: 32.0 KB
L2 Cache: 3.00 MB
L3 Cache: 0.00 B
Bus Frequency: 800 MHz
Memory: 4.00 GB
Memory Type: 667 MHz DDR2 SDRAM
SIMD: 1
BIOS: Apple Inc. MB41.88Z.00C1.B00.0802091535
Processor Model: Intel Core 2 Duo T8300
Processor Cores: 2

Integer (Score: 2688)
Blowfish single-threaded scalar -- 1669, , 73.3 MB/sec
Blowfish multi-threaded scalar -- 3390, , 139.0 MB/sec
Text Compress single-threaded scalar -- 1819, , 5.82 MB/sec
Text Compress multi-threaded scalar -- 3389, , 11.1 MB/sec
Text Decompress single-threaded scalar -- 1623, , 6.67 MB/sec
Text Decompress multi-threaded scalar -- 3259, , 13.0 MB/sec
Image Compress single-threaded scalar -- 1706, , 14.1 Mpixels/sec
Image Compress multi-threaded scalar -- 3143, , 26.4 Mpixels/sec
Image Decompress single-threaded scalar -- 1496, , 25.1 Mpixels/sec
Image Decompress multi-threaded scalar -- 2865, , 46.7 Mpixels/sec
Lua single-threaded scalar -- 2669, , 1.03 Mnodes/sec
Lua multi-threaded scalar -- 5237, , 2.01 Mnodes/sec

Floating Point (Score: 4862)
Mandelbrot single-threaded scalar -- 1777, , 1.18 Gflops
Mandelbrot multi-threaded scalar -- 3513, , 2.30 Gflops
Dot Product single-threaded scalar -- 3214, , 1.55 Gflops
Dot Product multi-threaded scalar -- 6621, , 3.02 Gflops
Dot Product single-threaded vector -- 2557, , 3.06 Gflops
Dot Product multi-threaded vector -- 5737, , 5.97 Gflops
LU Decomposition single-threaded scalar -- 691, , 615.5 Mflops
LU Decomposition multi-threaded scalar -- 1370, , 1.20 Gflops
Primality Test single-threaded scalar -- 3834, , 572.6 Mflops
Primality Test multi-threaded scalar -- 5821, , 1.08 Gflops
Sharpen Image single-threaded scalar -- 4959, , 11.6 Mpixels/sec
Sharpen Image multi-threaded scalar -- 9668, , 22.3 Mpixels/sec
Blur Image single-threaded scalar -- 6279, , 4.97 Mpixels/sec
Blur Image multi-threaded scalar -- 12029, , 9.46 Mpixels/sec

Memory (Score: 2128)
Read Sequential single-threaded scalar -- 2987, , 3.66 GB/sec
Write Sequential single-threaded scalar -- 1873, , 1.28 GB/sec
Stdlib Allocate single-threaded scalar -- 1948, , 7.27 Mallocs/sec
Stdlib Write single-threaded scalar -- 1851, , 3.83 GB/sec
Stdlib Copy single-threaded scalar -- 1981, , 2.04 GB/sec

Stream (Score: 1738)
Stream Copy single-threaded scalar -- 1704, , 2.33 GB/sec
Stream Copy single-threaded vector -- 1831, , 2.38 GB/sec
Stream Scale single-threaded scalar -- 1771, , 2.30 GB/sec
Stream Scale single-threaded vector -- 1838, , 2.48 GB/sec
Stream Add single-threaded scalar -- 1528, , 2.31 GB/sec
Stream Add single-threaded vector -- 1960, , 2.73 GB/sec
Stream Triad single-threaded scalar -- 1790, , 2.47 GB/sec
Stream Triad single-threaded vector -- 1489, , 2.79 GB/sec

I would say that the issues relate to the video drivers rather than the operating system itself given the numbers who seem to be happy and have GMA 950, GMA X3100 or ATI based Mac's.
 
Happy in the UK

Estimated delivery date: Friday 28th August.

Just in time for the long holiday weekend. Excellent :D
 

Attachments

  • Order shipped.JPG
    Order shipped.JPG
    40.2 KB · Views: 164
Will other Apple-authorized retailers (BestBuy, etc.) have Snow Leopard available on launch day? I'll be out of my town that has an Apple Store. Yes, I could wait, but I've got nothing to do this weekend out of town, and wanted to play around with the new OS.
 
BigTRQ said:
Will other Apple-authorized retailers (BestBuy, etc.) have Snow Leopard available on launch day? I'll be out of my town that has an Apple Store. Yes, I could wait, but I've got nothing to do this weekend out of town, and wanted to play around with the new OS.
Click to expand...

Can't hurt to check. Most retailers should have some stock tomorrow, it's just a question of whether they ordered enough.

jW
 
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