What apps are NO LONGER needed with Leopard?

neoben

macrumors member
Original poster
Sep 4, 2007
61
0
Howdy...

I hate to have things I don't need running in the background slowing things down, but I've had to have a few things running because they were missing in 10.4.

So, what apps am I running now that I can delete once 10.5 is installed?

So far:

1) QuickSilver - Is the new spotlight good enough to dump QS?
2) VirtueDesktop - I assume Spaces means this is no longer needed?
3) SuperDuper - Time Machine will take care of backups now?
4) PathFinder - New finder is good enough to ditch this?

Anyone else know what other 'additions' to OS10.4 can now be retired? What have I missed here?

-Ben
---------------------------------------------------------
neo-fight.tv - {The Weekly Technology Podcast}
 

jamesarm97

macrumors 65816
Sep 29, 2006
1,061
65
Howdy...

So far:

1) QuickSilver - Is the new spotlight good enough to dump QS?
-Ben
So, how good is spotlight at launching apps compared to QS? I just can't see myself living without QS. Control-Space / A few letters and Enter gets me running most everything instantly.

- James
 

mavis

macrumors 601
Jul 30, 2007
4,216
568
Tokyo, Japan
I don't think you want to write off SuperDuper just yet - Time Machine is great at backing up all of your data (minus whatever folders you choose to exclude) but SuperDuper is much better for running selective backups (ie, a single folder or two) ... I still plan on using SuperDuper to backup my images to a second external drive, I like keeping offsite and emergency backups, and I think TM isn't really suited for that.
 

JNB

macrumors 604
I don't think you want to write off SuperDuper just yet - Time Machine is great at backing up all of your data (minus whatever folders you choose to exclude) but SuperDuper is much better for running selective backups (ie, a single folder or two) ... I still plan on using SuperDuper to backup my images to a second external drive, I like keeping offsite and emergency backups, and I think TM isn't really suited for that.

Even more importantly, TM isn't bootable, whereas SD is.
 

johny5

macrumors 6502a
Mar 31, 2007
742
0
UK
Well time machine for me has been a complete nightmare!
I tried it on my imac 2.8 and macbook, both experiences were nasty.

Initially did a first backup on the imac with an external FW800 raid drive, although it appears to not backup all of the data, looks like it does it in sections even before it starts doing the hourly backups. Anyway the prob i have on the 2.8 mac is that it takes soooooooooo long for the incremental's to work i ended up turning it off as the hdd noise was too much for me.
Then I tried an external usb2 400gig on it, well this just failed with errors indicating that the drive may be faulty, i reformatted it then tried this on the macbook, failed with the same errors.
Made me suspitious as the drive wasnt that old and had been in full use archiving data before Time Machine.
I purchased a new 2.5" 250gb external sata (usb2) for the macbook to try out time machine, I have about 180gig of info on there.
1st backup it backed up 80 gig then said it was going to carry on in an hour - fair enough?
an hour passed, sure enough it kicked in to play, and then failed after about 2 mb of data (it pauses for an AGE saying it is "preparing" and this is what it did with the external 400gig). Anyway it failed with a none descriptive error, something like, "hey its failed" and thats that.

needless to say, for me on 2 machines with 3 different HDD's time machine is a load of rubbish. Oh yes it looks great on paper and ive seen it working, but right now - not here.
Its disabled.
 

mavis

macrumors 601
Jul 30, 2007
4,216
568
Tokyo, Japan
Well time machine for me has been a complete nightmare!
That's odd, it's working perfectly here on the same machine (2.8GHz iMac)

The only thing I did notice was that I had hourly backups from last night (all night) but the iMac was supposed to be asleep ... I hope Time Machine doesn't wake the computer up for the incremental updates, because if you have it set to sleep after any more than an hour of inactivity, it basically means your computer will NEVER sleep. :eek:
 

IJ Reilly

macrumors P6
Jul 16, 2002
17,892
1,477
Palookaville
Probably OT, but I don't have to install Leopard to know that Classic is totally dead, along with all the applications that used to run under Classic. This is a bummer of the first order, especially since Apple failed to notify us of Classic's demise. I can't even install Leopard until I can find a solution to this problem.
 

siurpeeman

macrumors 603
Dec 2, 2006
6,311
18
the OC
So, how good is spotlight at launching apps compared to QS? I just can't see myself living without QS. Control-Space / A few letters and Enter gets me running most everything instantly.

- James
that's all you have to do in leopard, though spotlight was never bad at launching apps in tiger. you press cmd-space, a couple letters and cmd-return. and in leopard, return launches the app, and cmd-return reveals the app in the finder. throw in boolean searching, calculator functionality and browser history searching, and spotlight really can't be beat. not as an app launcher anyway.
 

xUKHCx

Administrator emeritus
Jan 15, 2006
12,587
6
The Kop
I'll be using Mail for my RSS when I get Leopard, will be dumping Vienna.
I dunno about that one, i use vienna and Mails rss feed doesn't seem up to it. We will see. I like Viennas ability to open the web pages. I have mail in a separate space and if i want to read the story it then flips the space to Safari. Whereas in Vienna i can get all my reading done in one app.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.