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.
Snow Leopard Reviews Begin Rolling Out
- Thread starter Chupa Chupa
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Makes me feel good to have switched to Apple.
As Paul Thurrott (a Windows guy, but he's right here) would say, there is a difference between how fast benchmarks say something is and how fast something feels and I can say that, from my time with Snow Leopard, it feels significantly faster. Programs launch faster and windows behave smoother (especially Finder). Call of Duty 4 doesn't run any better on my Macbook but Safari, Mail and other daily-use apps just run better. I would also hope that once more highly intensive apps are updated for Snow Leopard they will incorporate some of the technologies that will make them run better on 10.6 than 10.5.
It's been debated that the 2008 MacBook PROS will have support for the new multi touch as well as the first UNIBODY MacBooks. The old plastic MacBooks will not get the support as they had the early iterations of multi touch hardware and can't support it (reiterating what I've heard, sounds logical).
I've always been interested in 1Password, but always been scared of situations like this, and ultimately when I am accessing accounts from a computer other than my home one and don't know the password that it generated and stored.
It was the Infoworld review that stated that this would go all the way back to 2006 machines.
"7. No more gesture segregation
I have a late-2006 model MacBook Pro at home, and it's frustrating that its gesture-capable trackpad supports only the first generation of touch gestures (one- and two-finger moves), not the second-generation three- and four-finger options. Snow Leopard fixes that, so gesture-capable trackpads now support all gestures, no matter what Mac model you have. (Of course, your Mac has to have a gesture-capable trackpad, so models before 2006 aren't helped out by this update.)"
http://www.infoworld.com/d/mac/7-best-features-in-mac-os-x-snow-leopard-573
What the heck is this crap about you can upgrade Tiger with it? Does the license permit it? If not, it's theft and illegal. Just because you can doesn't mean you should. If he's advocating piracy he needs to be called out on it.
Do we all really want Apple to start with draconian license enforcement like Microsoft does?
You're an idiot. Before you start accusing one of the most prominent tech journalists out there - a man who literally has Steve Jobs' cell phone number - of "advocating piracy", you might want to do your homework. Yes, the license allows it. No, it's not theft and illegal. Yes, Mossberg checked with Apple and it told him it was allowed, although it prefers you to pay $170. You want to pay Apple an extra $150 because its marketing says you should? Go ahead. In the meantime, spare us your knee-jerk and smug "piracy, piracy, piracy!" shouts of fire. The theatre is not burning down.
Kudos for Mossberg for not being a lemming and just regurgitating what Apple marketing told him, unlike a host of other professional reviewers. He actually took the time to test a company's claims to see if it was true. Shocking, a reviewer who actually did the work!
And for a slightly different perspective: http://www.winsupersite.com/alt/snowleopard.asp
Ehh, what? OS X has had basic multi-(core/processor) functionality from the beginning. He's obviously referring to Grand Central which is new, but does Windows really have something like that already? My impression was no, but I could be wrong. Either way, he makes it sound like OS X is just now becoming multiprocessor-capable at all with Snow Leopard.
I also enjoy how he calls Apple's installer "cryptic" without expanding what he means by that. Kind of a "cryptic" comment, you might say. And he also calls Quick Look a "new" utility in Snow Leopard.
Oh well. This is not surprising, given the name of the website. Still, it would have been nice to see a review from that perspective that didn't contain any glaring errors that suggested the reviewer didn't do their homework.
Ehh, what? OS X has had basic multi-(core/processor) functionality from the beginning. He's obviously referring to Grand Central which is new, but does Windows really have something like that already? My impression was no, but I could be wrong. Either way, he makes it sound like OS X is just now becoming multiprocessor-capable at all with Snow Leopard.
I also enjoy how he calls Apple's installer "cryptic" without expanding what he means by that. Kind of a "cryptic" comment, you might say. And he also calls Quick Look a "new" utility in Snow Leopard.
Oh well. This is not surprising, given the name of the website. Still, it would have been nice to see a review from that perspective that didn't contain any glaring errors that suggested the reviewer didn't do their homework.
I agree with you generally. MacDailyNews always pokes fun at Windows 7 as merely a service pack to Vista, which I understand. I am not aware of any new "features" that they are trying to use as a selling point for Windows 7, but it is kind of presumptuous to overlook the fact that Snow Leopard is essentially a service pack to Leopard. Both new OSs share share a number of general qualities with regards to the predecessors, such as: no new interface or major new features; both are focused on under the hood features; both are advertised as necessary upgrades focused on speed. Granted, someone can point out that SL has new features (such as expose from the dock), but I'm sure that Windows 7 won't be without its small round up of enhancements.
In fact, assuming that Windows 7 doesn't suck that badly, it could be a highly recommended or even necessary upgrade for VIsta sufferers. However, because Leopard was already awesome and nearly flawless, and given the reviews of SL, it might not just be that necessary until a 10.6.1 release is available to address performance and bugs.
I actually love the new interface and hope they work it into more apps across the system in 10.7. I also expect most of their apps for their tablet OS to adopt something like this across the board.
Not bad reviews. I am looking forward to receiving my copy of SL. I ordered my upgrade in June after I bought my new MBP, unfortunately my status still says not yet shipped. I am doubting I will receive mine tomorrow.
I read Paul's Window Supersite's quick review: I'm really sick of him throwing in "jabs". If going fully 64-bit, GCD and Open CL is a service pack, he's more stupid than I thought. I hardly doubt you can push a 64-bit OS update through a service pack. He can go to hell.
Yes, GC is a big deal. It handles parallel processing blocks in a system-wide approach.
Enthusiasm for SL waning.
Although I've really been looking forward to this upgrade, the CS3 glitches are starting to make me think twice.
So the weekend is now looking a little easier, as there is unlikely to be any rush in this office to upgrade until these CS3 and Office bugs have been ironed out. Can't afford losing the productivity. CS3 hassles might be enough for us to do nothing until we can afford CS5.
Typical Adobe-Apple acrimony bubbles to the top once again to mess up a move forward. Oh for the days of Macromedia !!
Although I've really been looking forward to this upgrade, the CS3 glitches are starting to make me think twice.
So the weekend is now looking a little easier, as there is unlikely to be any rush in this office to upgrade until these CS3 and Office bugs have been ironed out. Can't afford losing the productivity. CS3 hassles might be enough for us to do nothing until we can afford CS5.
Typical Adobe-Apple acrimony bubbles to the top once again to mess up a move forward. Oh for the days of Macromedia !!
That's just Thurrott. He has a strange love/hate obsession with all things Apple. He does nothing but complain about Apple non-stop on his blog and podcast Windows Weekly. Yet, he owns practically every Apple product made in the last few years.
He has personal issues with Apple's culture as a company (secretiveness, Steve Jobs' control, marketing, etc). He also doesn't understand why Apple spends resources on marketing developer APIs to consumers. He's had similar complaints in the past about the Core frameworks (Image, Animation, Video, Data, Audio, etc) and Quartz Extreme. He doesn't realize by giving these APIs clever marketing names, Apple raises awareness within the Mac community and developers start to build cool applications that utilize the new APIs (like Delicious Library and Pixelmator). It's a very different process than on Windows. You don't see Windows developers clamoring to use the latest Microsoft framework. On the Mac, you do. And it's OK if your software only runs on the latest Apple operating system.
I'm not sure why he even reviews Apple products. He'll say he does it because it's important to know what Microsoft's competition is doing. But I'm not convinced.
His Windows/Microsoft readers don't care about Apple, and he's never going to win over any Mac users either -- so why bother.
In your specific example, Thurrott was talking about Microsoft's task scheduler APIs that were introduced in Server 2003 (I believe) and to consumers with Windows Vista. He's right. Windows has had Grand Central-like task scheduler for awhile. Is it better than Grand Central? I don't know. Microsoft didn't bother giving it a clever marketing scheme, promoting it to consumers or touting it to developers.
Glad someone has finally clarified this, it's a shame people always wait until they can see that golden opportunity to declare someone wrong and call them names before contributing facts, but that's the Internet for you
Is there an online link to the EULA that we can look at, assuming the fact came from such a source or if anyone knows one?
Very nice of Apple to allow that. It's like the hidden legality of buying an OEM version of Windows (they don't want you to know but they don't mind when a few geeks do their research), only cheaper
IF it had been illegal, I'd have been quite miffed myself - not out of any high horse perspective (I'm no saint) but because Apple are so trusting and I wouldn't want to see a widespread break in that trust. I actively support it, such as buying a Family Pack for my own 3 Macs knowing that I could easily sneak the single one on. Trust is worth making yourself worthy of. But as it's legal, it's a different ball game, if I had a Tiger machine still, it'd be straight on there!
Well Windows has had multi-core capability for a very long time in computing terms so it was really just an extension of the stuff we had in the 90's. No big deal.
Although I've really been looking forward to this upgrade, the CS3 glitches are starting to make me think twice.
So the weekend is now looking a little easier, as there is unlikely to be any rush in this office to upgrade until these CS3 and Office bugs have been ironed out. Can't afford losing the productivity. CS3 hassles might be enough for us to do nothing until we can afford CS5.
Typical Adobe-Apple acrimony bubbles to the top once again to mess up a move forward. Oh for the days of Macromedia !!
I do wish Adobe had some good competition.
There's no online version of the license that I know of, you just have to read what came on the disc.
The sleigh-of-hand Apple is playing with this is interesting. If you look at its website, nowhere does it actually say you MUST have Leopard in order to use the Snow Leopard upgrade instead of the box set. In fact, on Snow Leopard's tech spec page, it lists the general requirements:
http://www.apple.com/macosx/specs.html
Curious that Leopard isn't on there, isn't it?
And on that same page, this is what it says about Tiger users upgrading to Snow Leopard:
I read that and Apple says Tiger users should, pretty please should, buy the box set. It's directing Tiger user to buy the box set but it's not phrased as a requirement or necessity. Apple prefers Tiger users buy the box set but they don't have to: "purchase the Mac Box Set" instead of "you must purchase the Mac Box Set." Apple marketing is playing word games, never outright saying the Snow Leopard upgrade can only be used current Leopard users.
Very sneaky and too clever by a half. Honestly, I don't see the point of doing this. Surely Apple knows that someone was going to discover that Tiger users could use the upgrade, although I suppose the fact that so few of the prominent reviewers caught this maybe proves Apple right. And Apple itself doesn't seem to care that Tiger users use the upgrade since it doesn't even have the installer look for Leopard, something that past upgrades have done. It's like Apple didn't do ANYTHING to actually make Tiger users buy the box set, except create finely worded press release and marketing campaign and trust gullible and lazy reviewers to not check. It seems a whole lot of fine, legalistic parsing of words and marketing and the cost of a separate SKU to gain a couple bucks.
Must mention here the price on the UK apple store - £25 for $29? Come on apple, that's a rip-off even for uk customers
UK prices include VAT, US don't. Might account for some of the difference.
I am not sure if I can upgrade to Mac OS X 0.6 Snow Leopard or not please help me, this is what I have on my imac:
Would you say its safe to upgrade to Snow Leopard? I know it says people who have Tiger can but does the ram or graphics card matter or I can still just upgrade it with no worries.
Would you say its safe to upgrade to Snow Leopard? I know it says people who have Tiger can but does the ram or graphics card matter or I can still just upgrade it with no worries.
I have been using the latest dev release and
1) It is faster but not OMG faster
2) Transmission just got some new 64 bit update and it works flawlessly
3) I see lot of things that would work better in a tablet, such as the new quicktime X UI
1) It is faster but not OMG faster
2) Transmission just got some new 64 bit update and it works flawlessly
3) I see lot of things that would work better in a tablet, such as the new quicktime X UI