*LTD*
macrumors G4
Not according to the vast majority of Apple's market. Your contention has no basis in reality. SL is no more buggy than Leopard was upon its release.
Snow leopard..... I wish I hadn't
- Thread starter RubbishBBspeed
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Not according to the vast majority of Apple's market. Your contention has no basis in reality. SL is no more buggy than Leopard was upon its release.
wrldwzrd89
macrumors G5
The biggest mistake Apple made with Snow Leopard, in my opinion, is the inability to "undock" the movie controls from the movie frame in QTX. I love the fadeout to focus on the content, though. Not so much of an issue for audio, though.
michael.lauden
macrumors 68020
cry me a river, safari outshines all of them - look at sunspider, and speed results and you'll find that if you can deal with perhaps one or two crashes a week with safari - you'll be using a much better browser
Eidorian
macrumors Penryn
I don't think making accusations is how you want to conduct damage control for Snow Leopard.Interesting how I always see these "SL is Apple's Vista" or "SL is the biggest FAIL" posts from new registrations on MR. My theory, PC Fanboys disguising themselves as Mac users or probably Hackintosh people, in the case of the Hackintosh people, I hope their systems FAIL.
I was deploying Leopard by this point across PowerPC and Intel machines except in certain instances with older hardware or VPN. I can't say the same for Snow Leopard. I'm not supporting it for now besides my test environment and anything new that can have Leopard installed is getting imaged with Leopard 10.5.8 for now. Anyone with a new iMac is out of luck if they want to buy their own machine.
10.6.1 was actually a step backward from 10.6 retail because of the additional anomalies it has introduced to my test machines.
I didn't start supporting Vista configurations until very late in the game but I'm support Windows 7 right now.
It's Apple's "fault" because of a too god software architecture...
OS X has a unique (and very nice) architectural feature of multi-architecture binaries. However, this is the root of many problems people see in Snow Leopard. Let me explain:
Leopard was a mixed 64 / 32 bit system (ignore Intel / PPC). Default was 32 bit. Applications wer build 32 bit if not explicitly requested otherwise. Almost all 3rd-party apps were 32 bit build.
Snow Leopard is pure 64 bit on capable systems, with 32 bit compatibility mode (and a few apps still 32 bit). For a well-functioning system, apps should be 64 bit and all libraries should support 64 and 32 bit clients.
When you upgrade from Leopard to Snow Leopard, the migration utility tries to preserve your old 3rd-party libraries, which might be 32 bit only. You end up with a mixed bag 32 / 64 bit system, which despite all the efforts put into Snow Leopard is an unhealthy situation.
Solution:
(1) Clean install Snow Leopard, do not migrate your old user environment, settings and apps/libraries. Setup your account freshly. (This is less a hassle as it sounds)
(2) Search for new versions of your apps/libraries "build for Snow Leopard", which implies they have the right architecture support.
(3) rebuild own (or build-from-source) apps and libraries with "-arch i386 -arch x86_64" for CFLAGS, CXXFLAGS, LDFLAGS ...
You will see you get an agile and smooth running system....
The 32 -> 64 bit transition was never easy, and (IMHO) no other system made it so easy like MacOS X...
Ah and btw., in my experience most of the Safari 4 crashes are caused by the Java Virtual Machine............
Good luck and have fun,
Manfred
OS X has a unique (and very nice) architectural feature of multi-architecture binaries. However, this is the root of many problems people see in Snow Leopard. Let me explain:
Leopard was a mixed 64 / 32 bit system (ignore Intel / PPC). Default was 32 bit. Applications wer build 32 bit if not explicitly requested otherwise. Almost all 3rd-party apps were 32 bit build.
Snow Leopard is pure 64 bit on capable systems, with 32 bit compatibility mode (and a few apps still 32 bit). For a well-functioning system, apps should be 64 bit and all libraries should support 64 and 32 bit clients.
When you upgrade from Leopard to Snow Leopard, the migration utility tries to preserve your old 3rd-party libraries, which might be 32 bit only. You end up with a mixed bag 32 / 64 bit system, which despite all the efforts put into Snow Leopard is an unhealthy situation.
Solution:
(1) Clean install Snow Leopard, do not migrate your old user environment, settings and apps/libraries. Setup your account freshly. (This is less a hassle as it sounds)
(2) Search for new versions of your apps/libraries "build for Snow Leopard", which implies they have the right architecture support.
(3) rebuild own (or build-from-source) apps and libraries with "-arch i386 -arch x86_64" for CFLAGS, CXXFLAGS, LDFLAGS ...
You will see you get an agile and smooth running system....
The 32 -> 64 bit transition was never easy, and (IMHO) no other system made it so easy like MacOS X...
Ah and btw., in my experience most of the Safari 4 crashes are caused by the Java Virtual Machine............
Good luck and have fun,
Manfred
Eidorian
macrumors Penryn
The default boot environment for Snow Leopard is 32-bit. The advantage is in the 64-bit kernel which is still limited to a handful of models. The core applications that Apple ships with OS X have been moved over to 64-bit but for all intents and purposes the majority of users aren't any better off than they were in Leopard. You have 64-bit Cocoa in Leopard.
The Kernel doesn't matter (and is 32 bit default to preserve kexts). What matters is the application-library relation, where you can't mix 32 and 64 bit, and the fact that system services are optimized for 64 bit systems.
Sorry, it's simply not possible to get an entirely properly functioning system without a clean install. Doesn't matter what OS we talk about, either. Refer to the post above that mentions the 32/64 bit library issues. When you still have old leftovers from the last OS present, you should expect trouble.
As to Apple not testing "enough", keep in mind that there are always issues with any new OS. They'll get ironed out. Leopard had its share of annoying issues too, but now that they are thoroughly ironed out, it's pretty much the most perfect OS I have ever seen with a combination of Unix, lovely GUI, and sweet stability. I have no doubt SL will get there; just give it time!
Interesting how I always see these "SL is Apple's Vista" or "SL is the biggest FAIL" posts from new registrations on MR. My theory, PC Fanboys disguising themselves as Mac users or probably Hackintosh people, in the case of the Hackintosh people, I hope their systems FAIL.
Yeah because Apple could NEVER release a poor OS.
I've owned a MacBook for over 3yrs thank you.
kate-willbury
macrumors 6502a
google chrome is faster. firefox has extensibility. safari just sits in the middle and has no real reason to even exist other than to test for compatibility by web developers/designers and to show off lame 'features' like coverflow everything. LOL.
My recommendation ...
If you have an empty portable disk of sufficient size (need only slightly more than used on your current system disk), create a bootable clone of your current system disk using Carbon Copy or the like.
Take note of all your installed apps and user/system settings. (Note your User-Id, home directory, etc. from Advanced Login Settings).
Test-boot your clone, ONLY IF SATISFIED reformat your system partition. Take extra care not to accidentally format the wrong partition!!!
While running on the clone, archive your address book.
Install Snow Leopard.
DO NOT MIGRATE (or "import existing settings", or as it is called by the installer......
Re-create your user account (make sure it has the same User-Id, home directory, etc. - see above)
Log into your account,
Mount your clone disk.
Import your address book archive, import mail (agreed, a bit tricky)
Install all needed applications, make sure to install only "Snow Leopard compatible" versions.
Copy your own stuff ....
Have fun......
Manfred
my snow leogard runs great..
i wish like to know #1 how to install snow leopard.
by upgrade or clean install
If you have an empty portable disk of sufficient size (need only slightly more than used on your current system disk), create a bootable clone of your current system disk using Carbon Copy or the like.
Take note of all your installed apps and user/system settings. (Note your User-Id, home directory, etc. from Advanced Login Settings).
Test-boot your clone, ONLY IF SATISFIED reformat your system partition. Take extra care not to accidentally format the wrong partition!!!
While running on the clone, archive your address book.
Install Snow Leopard.
DO NOT MIGRATE (or "import existing settings", or as it is called by the installer......
Re-create your user account (make sure it has the same User-Id, home directory, etc. - see above)
Log into your account,
Mount your clone disk.
Import your address book archive, import mail (agreed, a bit tricky)
Install all needed applications, make sure to install only "Snow Leopard compatible" versions.
Copy your own stuff ....
Have fun......
Manfred
calderone
Cancelled
Sorry, it's simply not possible to get an entirely properly functioning system without a clean install. Doesn't matter what OS we talk about, either. Refer to the post above that mentions the 32/64 bit library issues. When you still have old leftovers from the last OS present, you should expect trouble.
As to Apple not testing "enough", keep in mind that there are always issues with any new OS. They'll get ironed out. Leopard had its share of annoying issues too, but now that they are thoroughly ironed out, it's pretty much the most perfect OS I have ever seen with a combination of Unix, lovely GUI, and sweet stability. I have no doubt SL will get there; just give it time!
Well this goes against all the upgrade experiences I have had. As I said, it should not be required. If you think it is, then that leaves the majority of people who have no backups and no idea what they are doing in the dark, and stuck with Leopard.
If that is your contention, congratulations. I can't think of a more ridiculous opinion. A true clean install is not even in plain site of the user anymore during install. Which option do you think Apple prefers? If Apple is going to shove what can be considered an upgrade in the user's face, their is no reason for the user to choose otherwise.
I personally do clean installs, but it is mainly because I can. I have network home directories and I have the process automated through my server.
What are these "leftovers?" That is the problem here, no one has defined accurately what should be left behind. Plists? Are you suggesting the user abandon the settings they spent time setting up and spend time setting up again? This is ridiculous and should not be the case. Applications? There is no reason Apple couldn't quarantine Applications that they know will not work properly, or at the very least at the end of the install provide a list of currently installed 3rd party applications and recommend that the user check with the developer before running the Application under Snow Leopard. They could even use the Sparkle framework to go out and get the proper updates for the user.
Of course, this is all the users fault though. If they have to dive into /System/Library/SystemConfiguration and delete their com.apple.airport.preferences.plist because their airport connections are not working under Snow Leopard, it is their fault for bringing "leftovers" from the old OS. Mind you, these are Apple files, not created by a 3rd party. If Apple can't bring Network Connections over properly this means the user should do a clean install and set it all up again? Despite the fact that Apple shoves an upgrade in their face? Please, this is a very sad defense of Apple.
And why should someone expect trouble? Apple doesn't list on the package "If you are upgrading from Leopard, expect trouble." There are instances where you should, for example with Application Enhancer. However, in general there is no reason somehow should expect troubles. And despite having said it multiple times, it should not be expected when Apple is telling you to upgrade.
In regards to testing, of course there are issues. I never denied nor forgot this. But as my example suggests above, it is fairly basic to update plists to match what Snow Leopard is expecting for example a change in the layout, etc.
And Apple getting things ironed out eventually does not do much for those who have already upgraded, then have been told by those who have no idea how to fix things:
"Hey, do a clean install!"
"But, what about my stuff?"
"Don't bring any of it over, not even files that are crap."
"What is crap?"
"You should you know you are the one with crap on your machine!"
This is less than helpful.
You can sit around and defend Apple all you want. But there is a blatant contradiction between what Apple is suggesting during install, and what the arm chair technical support folks here are suggesting if there are problems. \
Now, instead of defending Apple I am going to help those who are in need of it. I suggest you do the same.
scotty96LSC
macrumors 65816
No issues here. I find it much faster all around.
colourfastt
macrumors 65816
I have 3 macs .. upgraded all of them to SL with no problems. Of course I have only about a dozen 3rd party apps and had sense enough not to migrate my information. Clean install - reinstall apps cleanly -- copied individual files back from my external but NEVER an app.
RubbishBBspeed
macrumors regular
Totally agree I'd like to get rid of the controls completely. It's not like they aren't already there on the keyboard and if im too far away to reach then use the remote.
Eidorian
macrumors Penryn
What are the issues with the 32/64 bit libraries? You're either under Leopard or Snow Leopard. The biggest difference being the 64-bit kernel in Snow Leopard but 32-bit is still default.
Cocoa 64 applications run just fine in either version and I know that Snow Leopard does have some performance tweaks to the libraries.
Can you elaborate on the problem because it seems like it's coming out of thin air. That or Apple can't write an installer. Now that's a real problem.
Cocoa 64 applications run just fine in either version and I know that Snow Leopard does have some performance tweaks to the libraries.
Can you elaborate on the problem because it seems like it's coming out of thin air. That or Apple can't write an installer. Now that's a real problem.
Your personal attacks are silly and aren't worth the time and internet bandwidth to address. But did you even read the thread????
Maybe your settings and stuff are all right, but there are always old libraries that get brought in along with them if you either upgrade or import your old settings via migration assistant, or whatever it calls itself. Those libraries can cause trouble because they can conflict with the libraries in the new OS, which are often updated and tweaked. This isn't only OS X. It's true for ALL operating systems! Better in the long run to just bring in your photos, music, video, documents, and email. That's all you really need anyway.
calderone
Cancelled
What personal attacks? Point them out please.
Old libraries? Did you not read the post above from Eidorian. Read that.
You are saying Migration Assistant, an application created by Apple, will bring over old Libraries that will cause conflicts? Read Eidorian's post above. Also, please give examples of these Libraries.
Since you edited your post. Sure it is better, but again, my claim never was that this wan't better. My claim was that it should not be required that you handle it this way. And there is much more that will be missing from a setup if you follow your method: Keychain, etc. If that is what Apple wants, they need to state that on the box and during install.
The main problem is that newer libraries often are tweaked or changed in some way. Any remaining old library can throw a monkey wrench into the works for that very reason. I'm not sophisticated enough to know for certain, but I'm guessing 32/64 bit libraries might not be compatible with one another anyway.
It's very difficult to get an installer to find literally everything that should be removed first. You could do it by hand, but it would take forever. Much easier to erase and install, then bring your documents and all that.
Eidorian
macrumors Penryn
Apple can't write an installer or Migration Assistant? It's somewhat shocking that I'm required to start over with a clean installation and a clean user space. Even more surprising how much effort they put into making upgrading the default operation and hiding the option to clean install so deeply for the majority of users.
I'm getting vague and long worded implications that upgrading is going to carry over some sort of crash and problem causing library cruft.
Calling my opinion ridiculous is a personal attack.
Look in your Library folder. There are two; one under your account and one under Macintosh HD. That's where all that stuff is stored. My understanding is that this is what migration assistant moves to your new OS. Perhaps you can ask it to move only plists? I've never used it.
Well, until someone finds a way to write an installer that really knows everything that must be ditched, we're stuck unfortunately. I would rather be able to upgrade worry-free as well, but I know better than to expect that regardless of OS.
It just increases the probability that something will get messed up. Judging by the number of people here who complain about SL being slow and buggy, it isn't exactly uncommon. A lot of those people upgraded.
It's beyond the pale how some folks expect things to be perfect; they aren't! Installers especially.
calderone
Cancelled
No it is an attack on your opinion, not your person.
I know perfectly well where the library folder is. You said Libraries not Library Folders. There is a significant difference between the two. Migration will move these things if you ask it to, however, you have not laid out your case for why this is a problem. You seem to be confused about the difference between a Library and the Library Folder. The Library folder contains Libraries, like in the Application Support Folder. However, there is more to it then this.
What exactly is incompatible? And how does this relate to your discussion of 32bit and 64bit?
You can move plists manually, but since they reside in the Library folder how can it be assured that these will not cause incompatibilities? On your view, it seems that they could. But the question is, why should they?
You have stated yourself that you are not sure how this works. What qualifies you then to make the claims you are making?
Are you saying Apple does not know the inner workings of the Operating System they created enough to write an installer that knows what to do?
Notice that I didn't call your opinion ridiculous.
It seems to me you are pulling red herrings across the path rather than offering anything convincing. Perhaps you'd like to actually tell me what's really going on since I'm so ignorant rather than attacking me. I don't think this conversation is worth my time. Good day!
It seems to me you are pulling red herrings across the path rather than offering anything convincing. Perhaps you'd like to actually tell me what's really going on since I'm so ignorant rather than attacking me. I don't think this conversation is worth my time. Good day!